Previous (Katzer Request to Seal Declaration)

Next (Our Copyright Reply)

November 7, 2008: Katzer filings

On November 7th, 2008, Katzer filed documents in the three existing motions.

He filed a reply to our opposition to his motion to dismiss our patent claims as moot. He also filed a reply to our opposition to his other motion, to dismiss and to strike parts of our complaint against him. At first glance, this contain the same arguments as before, trying to distract the Court from the real issue that Katzer is likely to continue to assert his improperly obtained patents.

Interestingly, Russell also filed a "response", along with a declaration from Katzer and a declaration from Russell himself. We're not entirely certain that this is even a reponse to, because Russell is no longer a party to the case at this own request.

We're still studying these, and will determine our next steps soon.

As expected, Katzer also filed an opposition to our motion for preliminary injunction, along with a declaration from Katzer and a number of exhibits. A first look indicates that Katzer is claiming that he does have permission to use the JMRI content because he holds the copyright on a QSI manual, because the JMRI decoder definitions are merely "manufacturer information", and because they "build on an effort" started by Katzer "to construct a master, uniform template of manufacturer's specification data". We disagree about all of this, and our reply will strongly rebut Katzer's evidence. Katzer is clearly still asserting that he has a right to use our content in violation of our license, and that he doesn't think he's done anything wrong. We also disagree about that. Our reply to this is due November 21st, and will be on the docket page shortly after it's filed.

Previous (Katzer Request to Seal Declaration)

Next (Our Copyright Reply)

---

---