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.

In re Personalized Media Communications, LLC., No. 11-1158 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2011)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 11-1158
Decided
October 13, 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

2011-1158

IN RE PERSONALIZED MEDIA COMMUNICATIONS, LLC

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences in Reexamination Nos. 90/006,563 and 90/006,698.

JUDGMENT

THOMAS J. SCOTT, JR., Goodwin Procter, LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for appellant.

NATHAN K. KELLEY, Associate Solicitor, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Alexandria, Virginia, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were RAYMOND T. CHEN, Solicitor, and SCOTT C. WEIDENFELLER, Associate Solicitor. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (LINN, PROST, and REYNA, Circuit

Judges).

2AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT October 13, 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

In re Personalized Media Communications, LLC., No. 11-1158 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2011).

Record ID
CAFC-11-1158-20111013
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-11-1158-20111013

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