Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Infernal Technology, LLC v. Sony Interactive Entertainment America, LLC
Case Number:
2:19-cv-00248
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Judge:
Firms
- Bragalone Olejko
- Buether Joe
- Carter Arnett
- Christian Attar LLC
- Erise IP
- Gillam Smith
- McGuireWoods
- Skiermont Derby
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
March 18, 2022
Sony Avoids New Trial After Winning Game Infringement Row
U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap has rebuffed two video game developers' bid for a new trial after a jury held that Sony's PlayStation console didn't rip off their patented technology, finding that the developers couldn't contest claim constructions that they'd previously agreed to.
-
December 08, 2021
Gilstrap Won't Ax Patents After Sony Video Game Win
U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap has shot down Sony's argument that a pair of video game patents should be invalidated in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's Alice ruling, two months after a jury in his Marshall, Texas, courthouse found that Sony's Playstation console doesn't infringe them.
-
October 07, 2021
EDTX Jury Clears Sony In Game Graphics Patent Trial
An Eastern District of Texas jury on Thursday found that Sony's Playstation console and video games did not infringe two Infernal Technology LLC patents relating to lighting and shadowing techniques in computer graphics.
-
November 20, 2020
Texas Patent Trials Halted Due To COVID-19 Spike
Eastern District of Texas Judge Rodney Gilstrap announced Friday he's postponing all jury trials until March, a decision he was reluctant to make but felt necessary due to the rapidly increasing number of COVID-19 cases in Texas and the travel restrictions out-of-state attorneys and witnesses were facing.
-
November 18, 2020
Sony Wants Pretrial Conference By Video After Atty Gets Virus
After a plaintiffs' lawyer tested positive for COVID-19 in a patent case against Sony involving computer graphics, the electronics giant has urged an Eastern District of Texas judge to hold an upcoming pretrial conference by video, while the plaintiffs argue that the hearing should go forward in-person because the infected attorney won't be there.