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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Thomas v. Pippin, No. 13-1142 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 15, 2013)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 13-1142
Decided
October 15, 2013
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 C. DOUGLASS THOMAS AND ALAN E. THOMAS,

Appellants,

v.

JACK D. PIPPIN,

Appellee.

2013-1142, -1143, -1144

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Interference No. 105,801, 105, 802, 105, 803.

JUDGMENT

C. DOUGLASS THOMAS, IpVenture, Inc., of Los Altos, California, argued for appellants.

WILLIAM F. LEE, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were MARK C. FLEMING, DONALD R. STEINBERG and ERIC FLETCHER; and WILLIAM G. MCELWAIN and CAROLYN JACOBS CHACHKIN, of Washington, DC. Of counsel were R. DANNY HUNTINGTON and

2WILLIAM N. HIGHET, Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C., of Washington, DC.

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 October 15, 2013 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole 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

Thomas v. Pippin, No. 13-1142 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 15, 2013).

Record ID
CAFC-13-1142-20131015
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-13-1142-20131015

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.