DCT

2:18-cv-00850

Guymon v. Litsey

Log In
Key Events
Complaint
complaint

Based on the analysis of the provided documents, the following memo outlines the preliminary findings and impediments to completing the requested patent infringement analysis.

I. Preliminary Findings and Impediments to Analysis

Based on the provided documents, it is not possible to generate the requested patent infringement analysis report. The core requirements of the prompt cannot be met for the following reasons:

II. Core Discrepancies Preventing Infringement Analysis

  • The Complaint is Not for Patent Infringement: The provided complaint, Guymon v. Litsey (Case 2:18-cv-00850-DB), is a declaratory judgment action concerning a dispute over the correct inventorship of a patent application (Serial No. 12/316,699). It does not allege patent infringement.

  • No Accused Product or Instrumentality: The complaint does not identify any product, service, or method that is accused of infringing a patent. The dispute is entirely between two individuals over who should be named as the inventor on a patent application.

  • No Asserted Patents-in-Suit: The legal action centers on a patent application, not an issued patent. Therefore, there are no asserted patent claims to analyze for infringement.

  • Mismatched Documents: The provided patent, U.S. Patent No. 12,316,699 B2, is completely unrelated to the legal dispute described in the complaint. The patent lists different inventors (Westerhoff et al.), a different applicant/assignee (PME IP PTY LTD), and pertains to a different technology ("Fast File Server Methods and Systems") than what is referenced in the complaint.

III. Conclusion

Because the complaint does not allege patent infringement and the provided patent is irrelevant to the legal action, the foundational elements required for the requested analysis—such as asserted claims, accused products, and infringement allegations—are absent.