decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


To read comments to this article, go here
Allen v. World A little jockeying
Friday, June 03 2011 @ 10:00 AM EDT

Not a lot of activity in the case, but it is clear that parties are starting to focus. This week Interval and three of the defendants agreed to stipulations allowing Interval to amend its infringement contentions, and in the case of AOL, Interval agreed to stipulate to AOL's amendment of its non-infringement contentions. What does this all mean? Well, Interval has been in contact with each of the parties, and they have shared enough information that at least some of the infringement contentions are being modified, likely narrowing some of the infringement claims that Interval is asserting. This should not be viewed as Interval conceding anything; rather, it is a focusing of the claims which should allow the case to proceed more efficiently. Here are the three sets of stipulations:




  View Printable Version


Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )