By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Sue L. Robinson in Golden Bridge Technology, Inc. v. Apple Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 10-428-SLR (D.Del., April 9, 2013), the Court granted the motion for summary judgment of non-infringement of defendant Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) as to the asserted claims in U.S. Patent Nos. 6,574,267 C1 (“the ‘267 patent”), as reexamined, and 7,359,427 (“the ‘427 patent”) (collectively, “the patents-in-suit”). In granting Apple’s motion, the Court concluded that “the accused devices do not directly infringe any of the asserted claims because they do not practice the limitation of ‘spreading an access preamble’ or a ‘spread access preamble,’ which is recited in each asserted claim. As there can be no indirect infringement without direct infringement, the accused devices or their methods of operation also do not indirectly infringe any of the asserted claims.” See id. at 17.
A copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached.