Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-03125/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-03125-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EXCEL INNOVATIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

INDIVOS CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants ___________________________________

INDIVOS CORPORATION, et al.,

Counterclaimants

 v.

EXCEL INNOVATIONS, INC., et al.,

Counterdefendants

 /

No. C-03-3125 MMC

ORDER GRANTING EXCEL’S MOTION

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND

MOTION TO DISMISS; VACATING

HEARING

Before the Court is the “Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss,” filed

January 14, 2008 by plaintiff/counterdefendant Excel Innovations, Inc. (“Excel”), by which

Excel seeks summary judgment on the 2nd through 16th, and on the 18th and 20th

counterclaims asserted by defendants/counterclaimants Indivos Corporation and Solidus

Networks, Inc. (collectively hereafter, “defendants”), and dismissal of the 17th and 19th

Case 3:03-cv-03125-MMC Document 484 Filed 04/10/08 Page 1 of 2
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

 Defendants’ 1st counterclaim was resolved by order dated May 27, 2004, and thus

adjudication of the instant motion will result in final resolution of all counterclaims.

2

 The April 25, 2008 hearing on the matter is hereby VACATED.

2

counterclaims asserted by defendants.1 On January 15, 2008, counterdefendant Ned

Hoffman joined in Excel’s motion. On April 9, 2008, defendants filed a “Statement of NonOpposition” to Excel’s motion.

Accordingly, Excel’s motion is hereby GRANTED as follows:

1. Excel shall have summary judgment entered in its favor on defendants’ 2nd

through 16th and defendants’ 18th counterclaims, and on defendants’ 20th counterclaim to

the extent it alleges Excel engaged in a conspiracy to commit patent infringement and

violate the Lanham Act.

2. Defendants’ 17th and 19th counterclaims are hereby DISMISSED without

prejudice to refiling in state court; defendants’ 20th counterclaim is hereby DISMISSED

without prejudice to such refiling, to the extent it alleges Excel engaged in a conspiracy to

violate state law.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 10, 2008 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:03-cv-03125-MMC Document 484 Filed 04/10/08 Page 2 of 2