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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC. v. Yahoo! Inc., No. 11-1281 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 13, 2012)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 11-1281
Decided
February 13, 2012
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

PAID SEARCH ENGINE TOOLS, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

YAHOO! INC.,

Defendant-Appellee,

and

GOOGLE INC.,

Defendant-Appellee,

and

MICROSOFT CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

2011-1281

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in No. 07-CV-0403, Judge David J. Folsom.

JUDGMENT

WARREN JEFFREY SEFTON, Keating Muething & Klekamp, PLL, of Cincinnati, Ohio, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was J. ROBERT CHAMBERS, Wood Herron & Evans, LLP, of Cincinnati, Ohio.

2DAVID A. PERLSON, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, of San Francisco, California, argued for all defendants-appellees. With him on the brief for defendant-appellee Google Inc., were CHARLES K. VERHOEVEN, EMILY C. O’BRIEN and ANTONIO R. SISTOS. On the brief for defendant-appellee Yahoo! Inc., were DOUGLAS E. LUMISH, Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP, of San Francisco, California; and EDWARD R. REINES, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, of Redwood Shores, California. On the brief for defendant-appellee Microsoft Corp., were CONSTANTINE L. TRELA, JR. and RICHARD A. CEDEROTH, Sidley Austin LLP, of Chicago, Illinois; and BRYAN K. ANDERSON, of Palo Alto, California. Of counsel was TACY F. FLINT

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

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

February 13, 2012 /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

Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC. v. Yahoo! Inc., No. 11-1281 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 13, 2012).

Record ID
CAFC-11-1281-20120213
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-11-1281-20120213

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.