By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in TQ Delta, LLC v. 2Wire, Inc., Civil Action No. 13-1835-RGA (D.Del. June 24, 2019), the Court denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s April 25, 2019 Order regarding Claim 17 of ‘881 Patent. In its motion for reargument/reconsideration, Plaintiff claimed that the Court made two clear errors of law in its prior Order. First, Plaintiff claimed that the Court made a clear error of law by deciding to not construe the claim term “to reduce a difference in latency.” Id. at *1. Second, Plaintiff claimed that the Court made a clear error of law when it decided that “To the extent Defendant wants to argue that infringement of the claim element is not shown because there is no evidence of an actual reduction in the difference of configuration latency, or that the specification does not provide written description for the term ‘reduce,’ it may do so.” Id. at *2. Ultimately, in denying the motion for reconsideration, the Court found that both underlying issues were questions of fact for the jury to decide. Id. at *2-3.
A copy of the Memorandum Order is attached.
[View source.]
