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 Ronald a. Katz Technology, No. 15-1170 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 15, 2015)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 15-1170
Decided
September 15, 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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: RONALD A. KATZ TECHNOLOGY

LICENSING, L.P.,

Appellant 2015-1170

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, in No. 90/012,036.

JUDGMENT

LOWELL D. MEAD, Cooley LLP, Palo Alto, CA, argued for appellant. Also represented by LORI R. MASON; FRANK V. PIETRANTONIO, Reston, VA.

ROBERT MCBRIDE, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for appellee Michelle K. Lee. Also represented by NATHAN K. KELLEY, THOMAS W. KRAUSE, STACY BETH MARGOLIES.

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

2PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, CLEVENGER and

HUGHES, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT September 15, 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 Ronald a. Katz Technology, No. 15-1170 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 15, 2015).

Record ID
CAFC-15-1170-20150915
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-15-1170-20150915

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