Mariner v TiVo - ORDER granting Motion to Stay All Deadlines and Notice of Settlement.

Before the Court is Plaintiff Mariner IC Inc.’s and Defendant TiVo Corporation’s Motion to Stay All Deadline and Notice of Settlement, wherein the Parties representant that they “have reached an agreement in principle to settle all matters in controversy” between them. Having considered the Motion, The Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be and hereby is GRANTED.

It is therefore ORDERED that all deadlines in the above-styled case as to Mariner and TiVo are hereby STAYED for 30 days from the date of this Order, during which time dismissal papers shall be tendered to the Court for entry, to facilitate settlement of this case as to Mariner and TiVo. This Order does not disturb any deadlines as to Mariner and Defendant AsusTek Computer Inc.

QPRC to present at Spring Investors Summit

QPRC will be presenting at this year's Spring Investor Summit on April 2nd at 9:30 AM in New York City at the Essex House.

The Spring Investor Summit is an exclusive event dedicated to connecting small and micro cap companies with high-level, institutional and retail investors.

The upcoming conference will feature 200 presenting companies, 1200 institutional and retail investors, 2000 one-on-one meetings, expert speakers, and industry panels.

For the most up to date list of companies, please visit www.springinvestorsummit.com

Report & Recommendation - CXT Systems, Inc. v. Academy, Ltd. et. al.

REPORT & RECOMMENDATION to DENY Motion to Dismiss For Failure to State a Claim

The Court concludes that the Message Board Search Patents are not directed to an abstract idea at Step 1, but that the Automatic Data Population Patents are directed to the abstract idea of pre-filling forms. Further, for both the Message Board Search Patents and the Automatic Data Population Patents, factual questions remain as to whether the ordered combination within the claims possess an inventive concept at Step 2. Further, Defendants have not shown that the challenged claims are representative of other claims within a given group. The Court therefore recommends that each of the Motions to Dismiss Plaintiff’s claims for patent infringement due to the absence of patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 be DENIED.