Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00894/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00894-16/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

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

- 1 - 07cv0894

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARL ZEISS VISION INTERNATIONAL

GMBH and CARL ZEISS VISION INC.,,

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 07cv0894 DMS (POR)

ORDER (1) DENYING

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR

JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF

LAW OF NONINFRINGEMENT

OF CLAIM 1, 5 AND 6 OF THE

‘713 PATENT, (2) DENYING

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF

LAW OF LITERAL

INFRINGEMENT OF CLAIM 6 OF

THE ‘713 PATENT AND (3)

DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER

OF LAW OF LITERAL

INFRINGEMENT OF CLAIM 1 OF

THE ‘713 PATENT 

[Docket Nos. 887, 890, 894]

vs.

SIGNET ARMORLITE, INC.,

Defendant. ____________________________________

AND ALL RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS.

This case comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motions for judgment as a matter of law of

literal infringement of claims 1 and 6 of the ‘713 Patent and Defendant’s motion for judgment as a

matter of law of noninfringement of claims 1, 5 and 6 of the ‘713 Patent. Each side has filed

opposition and reply briefs to each motion. For the reasons set out below, the Court denies the

motions.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 3:07-cv-00894-DMS-DHB Document 930 Filed 09/24/10 Page 1 of 3
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

- 2 - 07cv0894

I.

DISCUSSION

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a)(1) provides: 

If a party has been fully heard on an issue during a jury trial and the court finds that

a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for the

party on that issue, the court may: 

(A) resolve the issue against the party; and 

(B) grant a motion for judgment as a matter of law against the party on a claim or

defense that, under the controlling law, can be maintained or defeated only with a

favorable finding on that issue. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a)(1). In the Ninth Circuit, “‘[j]udgment as a matter of law is appropriate when the

evidence presented at trial permits only one reasonable conclusion.’” Torres v. City of Los Angeles,

548 F.3d 1197, 1205 (9th Cir. 2008), cert. denied by Roberts v. Torres, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 1995

(2009), (quoting Santos v. Gates, 287 F.3d 846, 851 (9th Cir. 2002)). “In other words, ‘[a] motion for

a judgment as a matter of law is properly granted only if no reasonable juror could find in the nonmoving party’s favor.’” Id. (quoting El-Hakem v. BJY Inc., 415 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005)).

When considering a motion for judgment as a matter of law, the court must view the evidence “‘in the

light most favorable to the nonmoving party, and all reasonable inferences must be drawn in favor of

that party.’” Id. at 1205-06 (quoting LaLonde v. County of Riverside, 204 F.3d 947, 959 (9th Cir.

2000)). “‘If conflicting inferences may be drawn from the facts, the case must go to the jury.’” Id.

at 1206 (quoting LaLonde, 204 F.3d at 959). 

Here, the Court has reviewed the evidence on the issue of infringement, and finds that a

reasonable jury would have a sufficient evidentiary basis to find for either party. Accordingly, neither

side is entitled to judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Rule 50(b).

II.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motions for judgment as a matter of law

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 3:07-cv-00894-DMS-DHB Document 930 Filed 09/24/10 Page 2 of 3
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

- 3 - 07cv0894

of literal infringement of claims 1 and 6 of the ‘713 Patent and denies Defendant’s motion for

judgment as a matter of law of noninfringement of claims 1, 5 and 6 of the ‘713 Patent. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 24, 2010

HON. DANA M. SABRAW

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00894-DMS-DHB Document 930 Filed 09/24/10 Page 3 of 3