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 Interval Licensing LLC, No. 14-1775 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 17, 2015)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 14-1775
Decided
April 17, 2015
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 IN RE: INTERVAL LICENSING LLC,

Appellant 2014-1775

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. 90/011,577, 90/012,074.

JUDGMENT

NATHAN J. DAVIS, Heim, Payne, Chorush, LLP, Houston, TX, argued for appellant. Also represented by MICHAEL F. HEIM; PATRICK FINNAN, Edell Shapiro and Finnan, Gaithersburg, MD.

MOLLY R. SILFEN, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for appellee Michelle K. Lee. Also represented by NATHAN K. KELLEY, SYDNEY O. JOHNSON, JR., THOMAS W. KRAUSE.

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

2PER CURIAM (NEWMAN, LOURIE, and O’MALLEY, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT April 17, 2015 /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

In re Interval Licensing LLC, No. 14-1775 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 17, 2015).

Record ID
CAFC-14-1775-20150417
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-14-1775-20150417

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 15, 2026 · Report an error