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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. ITC, No. 13-1519 (Fed. Cir. May 14, 2014)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 13-1519
Decided
May 14, 2014
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
3 pages

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. AND

SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,

LLC,

Appellants,

v.

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Appellee,

AND

APPLE INC.,

Intervenor.

2013-1519

Appeal from the United States International Trade Commission in Investigation No. 337-TA-794.

JUDGMENT

CHARLES K. VERHOEVEN, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, of San Francisco, California, argued for appellants. With him on the brief were KEVIN P. JOHNSON and VICTORIA F. MAROULIS, of Redwood Shores, Califor-

2nia; ALAN L. WHITEHURST, DEREK L. SHAFFER and MARISSA R. DUCCA, of Washington, DC; and THOMAS D. PEASE, of New York, New York. Of counsel were WILLIAM ADAMS and KATHLEEN M. SULLIVAN of New York, New York; PAUL F. BRINKMAN and SCOTT A. LASHER, of Washington, DC, and ROBERT JASON BECHER, of Los Angeles, California.

CLARK S. CHENEY, Attorney, Office of General Counsel, United States International Trade Commission, of Washington, DC, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were DOMINIC L. BIANCHI, General Counsel, and WAYNE W. HERRINGTON, Assistant General Counsel.

WILLIAM F. LEE, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, argued for intervenor. With him on the brief were RICHARD W. O’NEILL and JOSEPH J. MUELLER; MARK D. SELWYN, of Palo Alto, California; JAMES L. QUARLES III, NINA S. TALLON and GREGORY H. LANTIER, of Washington, DC; and JAMES M. DOWD, of Los Angeles, California. Of counsel were MARK C. FLEMING and LAUREN B. FLETCHER, of Boston, Massachusetts.

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

3May 14, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court

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

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. ITC, No. 13-1519 (Fed. Cir. May 14, 2014).

Record ID
CAFC-13-1519-20140514
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-13-1519-20140514

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.