Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 16, 2020

Bot M8 LLC v. Sony Corporation Of America

Judge
William Alsup
Docket
3:19-cv-07027
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In Bot M8 LLC v. Sony Corporation Of America, Judge Alsup denied leave to seek reconsideration of an order concerning dismissed patents.

Who this affects

Bot M8 LLC, the patent owner, and Sony Corporation Of America and the other defendants.

What happened

Bot M8 LLC, the patent owner, asked the court for permission to seek reconsideration of an April 2 order denying permission to reassert several previously dismissed patents.

The court said reconsideration requires unusual circumstances, such as new evidence, a clear mistake, or a change in controlling law. It found that Bot M8’s theory about the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and patent rights lacked supporting case law, and that Bot M8 identified no binding decision requiring a different pleading or amendment standard.

The court also rejected Bot M8’s disagreement about the record, noting that it had directed reverse engineering of the Sony PlayStation 4 at a November 21, 2019 case-management conference. Judge William Alsup denied the request.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Bot M8 LLC v. Sony Corporation Of America · No. 3:19-cv-07027
Judge
William Alsup
Date
Apr. 16, 2020

Background

Bot M8 LLC, described as the patent owner, sought leave to file a motion for reconsideration. The proposed motion concerned an April 2 order that had denied leave to reassert several patents that had previously been dismissed. The court stated that both parties had been heard before ruling on the request.

Court’s analysis

The court applied the standard for reconsideration, which is a request asking the court to revisit an earlier order. It stated that such relief generally requires highly unusual circumstances, including newly discovered evidence, a clear error by the court, or an intervening change in controlling law. Under the cited local rule, clear error includes a manifest failure to consider material facts or dispositive legal arguments.

The court concluded that Bot M8’s theory that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act crossed paths with patent rights remained unsupported by case law. It also stated that Bot M8 had identified no binding decision requiring a different standard for pleading or amendment. In addition, the court rejected Bot M8’s reading of the record, noting that it had directed reverse engineering of the Sony PlayStation 4 at the November 21, 2019 case-management conference. The court said Bot M8’s disagreements were understandable but did not justify extraordinary relief.

Ruling

The court denied Bot M8 LLC’s request for leave to move for reconsideration. The order was signed by Judge William Alsup on April 16, 2020.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.