Google et al Argue with Paul Allen’s Interval Licensing: One Big Case or 11? Or None?

“Do you remember when Google, Apple, Facebook, OfficeMax, Yahoo!
and Netflix/OfficeDepot/Staples/eBay all filed motions to dismiss
or sever Paul Allen’s Interval Licensing’s patent infringement
complaint? They filed to dismiss for misjoinder and Google filed a
motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Google and the
others want the cases separated into eleven instead of one
humungous case, if the court doesn’t toss the complaint out.

“Allen has answered with his opposition to both ideas. And the
accused Gang of Eleven read the filings and their response could be
described simply like this: What do we all have in common? How can
it possibly work for any of us to have to go forward as a group?
And Google writes, “Interval has not identified any products of any
of the defendants that are allegedly infringing.” All it has said
“without explanation” is that all the defendants infringe one of
its patents with “similar” functionality, but there are no facts to
support the claim. What functionality? What is the claim?

“All of them say the same thing: that Interval Licensing’s
complaint is too vague, and thus they can’t prepare. Google tells
the court:

“Interval’s Complaint provides no notice as to what Google (or
any of the other named disparate Defendants) does that purportedly
infringes the patents-in-suit.”

Complete
Story