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.

Yangaroo, Inc. v. Destiny Media Technologies Inc., No. 10-1424 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 14, 2011)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 10-1424
Decided
March 14, 2011
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

YANGAROO, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

DESTINY MEDIA TECHNOLOGIES INC.,

DESTINY SOFTWARE PRODUCTIONS INC.,

and MPE DISTRIBUTION, INC.,

Defendants-Appellees.

2010-1424

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin in No. 09-CV-0462, Judge William C. Griesbach.

JUDGMENT

JONATHAN H. MARGOLIES, Michael Best & Friedrich, LLP, of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was KATHERINE W. SCHILL.

TED SABETY, Sabety & Associates, PLLC, of New York, New York, argued for defendants-appellees.

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

PER CURIAM (BRYSON, SCHALL, and MOORE, Circuit

Judges). AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT March 14, 2011 /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

Yangaroo, Inc. v. Destiny Media Technologies Inc., No. 10-1424 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 14, 2011).

Record ID
CAFC-10-1424-20110314
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-10-1424-20110314

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