(January 12, 2015 – Tyler, Texas) Judge Caroline Craven denied Defendant Audible Magic’s Motion to Strike Plaintiff Blue Spike, LLC’s preliminary infringement contentions. Blue Spike, LLC v. Texas Instruments, et al., 6:12-cv-499-MHS-CMC, Dkt. No. 1898. Plaintiff Blue Spike, LLC served preliminary contentions in February of 2014 and upon request of Defendant Audible Magic, amended those infringement contentions to respond to alleged deficiencies. Defendant Audible Magic filed a motion to strike the original infringement contentions shortly thereafter. After engaging in discovery, Defendant Audible Magic yet again requested that Plaintiff supplement its infringement contentions with additional information gathered through discovery. In denying Defendant’s motion, the Court noted that while more specificity “may” be appropriate as additional information comes to light, “[n]otice is the core function” of the infringement contentions; “this notice…’need not meet the level of detail required, for example, on a motion for summary judgment.’” Id. at 3. Judge Craven ruled that Blue Spike, LLC provided adequate notice of its infringement theories to Audible Magic and denied Defendants motion.
Plaintiff Blue Spike, LLC is represented by Randall Garteiser, Christopher Honea, Kirk Anderson, Ian Ramage, Molly Jones, and Peter Brasher of Garteiser Honea PLLC.
Defendant Audible Magic Corp. is represented by I. Neel Chatterjee, Gabriel Ramsey, Alyssa Caridis, and Christopher Higgins of Orrick, Herrington, and Sutcliffe and Eric Findlay, Brian Craft, and Walter Lackey of Findlay Craft PC of Tyler, Texas.
