Google's Motion to Dismiss Paul Allen's Patent Infringement Complaint Granted

"Paul Allen's patent infringement complaint against the world and its dog has been dismissed.

"The court agreed with Google et al that it "lacks adequate factual detail to satisfy the dictates of Twombly and Iqbal" and also "fails to provide sufficient factual detail as suggested by Form 18". The court doesn't agree with Allen's Interval Licensing that the two cases do not apply to patent complaints, but it doesn't even need to go there: "The Court does not find it necessary to determine whether Form 18 is no longer adequate under Twombly and Iqbal because Plaintiff's complaint fails to satisfy either the Supreme Court's interpretation of Rule 8 or Form 18."

"Go Google. That was their argument in their motion to dismiss, along with AOL's. Google said the complaint was too vague to meet the standard under Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) and Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007)."

Complete Story

Related Stories:

• About Those 882 Novell Patents: This is Where OIN Comes In(Dec 08, 2010)
• Oracle's Reply to Google's Answer with Counterclaims(Dec 02, 2010)
• Editor's Note: Thank You(Nov 24, 2010)
• Novell Agrees to be Acquired by AttachMate; Sells Some IP to a MS-Organized Consortium(Nov 23, 2010)
• Google et al Argue with Paul Allen's Interval Licensing: One Big Case or 11? Or None?(Nov 22, 2010)
• Oracle declines to press its motion to dismiss, so motion is dismissed(Nov 19, 2010)
• Google Files Sizzling Answer to Oracle's Amended Complaint and its Opposition to Motion to Dismiss(Nov 11, 2010)