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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Power Management Solutions v. Qualcomm Incorporated, No. 13-1477 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 16, 2014)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 13-1477
Decided
April 16, 2014
Judge
Taranto, J.
Document
Order on Motion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

POWER MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,

Defendant-Appellee.

2013-1477

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in No. 13-CV-0130, Judge Richard G. Andrews.

ON MOTION

Before PROST, O’MALLEY and TARANTO, Circuit Judge.

O R D E R

The parties jointly move to affirm the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. In addition to the complaint giving rise to this appeal, Power Management Solutions LLC brought three other2 2 POWER MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED

relevant complaints in the District of Delaware, asserting infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,504,909. See Power Management Solutions LLC v. Advanced Micro Devices Inc., No. 2013-1455; Power Management Solutions LLC v. NVIDIA Corp., No. 2013-1456; and Power Management Solutions LLC v. Intel Corp. et al., No. 2013-1457 (collectively, the “Related Cases”). In all three Related Cases, the district court entered a stipulated judgment of noninfringement, allowing Power Management to appeal from adverse claim construction rulings.

In August 2013, while the Related Cases were on appeal, the parties jointly moved to stay proceedings in this case. The parties stipulated that, if this court were to affirm the judgments in the Related Cases, this court should affirm the judgment in this appeal. We granted the parties’ motion to stay this appeal pending final disposition of the Related Cases. Now that this court has affirmed the judgments of the district court in the Related Cases and the mandates have issued, we summarily affirm the judgment of the district court in this case. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted. The judgment of the District Court for the District of Delaware is affirmed.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

FOR THE COURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court s19 ISSUED AS A MANDATE: April 16, 2014

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

Power Management Solutions v. Qualcomm Incorporated, No. 13-1477 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 16, 2014).

Record ID
CAFC-13-1477-20140416
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-13-1477-20140416

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.