Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-04483/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-04483-26/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

POSTX CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SECURE DATA MOTION, INC. d/b/a/

SIGABA,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

AND RELATED COUNTER-CLAIMS. 

 /

No. C 02-04483 SI

ORDER RE POSTX LETTER REQUEST

FOR “CLARIFICATION” OF FINAL

PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

In its Final Pretrial Scheduling Order issued February 9, 2006 (docket #240), the Court denied

subpart B of PostX’s motion in limine No. 8, which sought to exclude all references to “sham litigation”

in the trial. By way of clarification: the Court meant to deny that motion. It is true that the Court has

ruled in PostX’s favor on the question whether the patent litigation was “sham litigation” within the

meaning of Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Ind., Inc., 508 U.S. 49 (1993),

and that this question will not be presented to the jury for decision. Nevertheless, it is entirely possible

that reference to the term or concept during trial may be relevant and appropriate. Therefore, this

subpart of PostX’s 8th motion in limine was denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 22, 2006 _____________________________

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:02-cv-04483-SI Document 1045 Filed 02/22/06 Page 1 of 1