Patent Case Watch

Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Applied Materials, Inc. v. Multimetrixs, LLC., No. 10-1149 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 9, 2010)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 10-1149
Decided
December 9, 2010
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages
Download Opinion (PDF)

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

MULTIMETRIXS, LLC, MARK KESEL,

BORIS KESIL, and ELIK GERSHENZON,

Defendants-Appellants.

2010-1149, -1150

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 06-CV-7372, Judge Marilyn Hall Patel.

JUDGMENT

ROHIT K. SINGLA, Munger, Tolles & Olson, LLP, of San Francisco, California, argued for plaintiff-appellee. With him on the brief were VIRGINIA L. BOESCH and SARALA V. NAGALA.

JEFFREY I. KAPLAN, Kaplan Gilman & Pergament LLP, of Woodbridge, New Jersey, argued for defendant-appellee.

2THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (GAJARSA, PROST, and MOORE, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT December 9, 2010 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date Jan Horbaly Clerk

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Applied Materials, Inc. v. Multimetrixs, LLC., No. 10-1149 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 9, 2010).

Record ID
CAFC-10-1149-20101209
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-10-1149-20101209

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.

Source: Federal Circuit opinions and orders · retrieved August 14, 2026 · Report an error