Court grants summary judgment to Bally Technologies

LAS VEGAS, Nevada -- (PRESS RELEASE) -- Bally Technologies, Inc. (NYSE: BYI), a leader in slots, video machines, casino management systems and networked solutions for the global gaming industry, today announced that the United States District Court for the District of Nevada granted summary judgment motions in Bally's favor in a patent case in which International Game Technology (NYSE: IGT) and Shuffle Master, Inc. (Nasdaq: SHFL) alleged that Bally's MP21 table-game system infringed the claims of two patents owned by IGT and Shuffle Master.

"This is a vindication of Bally's position in this case," said Richard M. Haddrill, President and Chief Executive Officer of Bally Technologies. "The District Court's ruling supports our view that our product decisions are based on sound intellectual property filings and evaluations and made with care."

Bally's General Counsel and Senior Vice President Mark Lerner added, "The court's emphasis of the 'obviousness' principles enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court in the recent KSR decision is especially encouraging because it is our view that many of the patents asserted by IGT outside this litigation have similar characteristics of obviousness."

The District Court ruled that one of the patents asserted by IGT and Shuffle Master -- the "Schubert" patent (U.S. Patent No. 6,313,871) -- is invalid under the "obviousness" doctrine recently addressed by the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. In addition to ruling that the Schubert patent is invalid, the District Court also noted that Bally would be entitled to partial summary judgment of non-infringement.

The District Court further ruled that Bally's system does not infringe on the other patent -- the "Fishbine" patent (U.S. Patent No. 5,781,647) -- asserted by IGT and Shuffle Master. The District Court also noted that the validity of the Fishbine patent is a close question, though the court did not specifically rule on that issue. The District Court also granted Bally's motion for summary judgment dismissing IGT and Shuffle Master's claim that an inventor of the Schubert patent should have been named as an inventor of several Bally patents.

The asserted claims of two patents brought by Bally as counterclaims against IGT and Shuffle Master were also invalidated on obviousness grounds similar to those applied to the IGT and Shuffle Master patents.

The District Court's summary judgment rulings dispose of IGT and Shuffle Master's patent infringement case. The court's order leaves intact two Bally counterclaims of patent infringement against IGT and Shuffle Master.

Update on other legal matters

Bally Technologies also announced that in the IGT Wheel/Bally iVIEW(TM) litigation (D. Nev., No. CV-S-04-1676-RCJ), the District Court recently pushed back the trial date from May to December 2008 to allow time for compliance with the court's orders granting Bally's motions that IGT produce additional revenue and other information and documents in response to Bally's discovery requests.

In the bonusing products case brought against Bally Technologies by IGT (D. Del., No. 06-282), the United States Patent and Trademark Office recently rejected all claims of another of the IGT patents asserted by IGT in that case. Of the nine patents and approximately 200 claims originally asserted by IGT in the case, five patents have been dismissed, leaving four patents (including the one mentioned above) and 10 claims remaining in the case.