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.

Neology, Inc. v. Kapsch Trafficcom Ivhs Inc., No. 17-1228 (Fed. Cir. June 6, 2018)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 17-1228
Decided
June 6, 2018
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

NEOLOGY, INC.,

Appellant

v.

KAPSCH TRAFFICCOM IVHS INC., KAPSCH

TRAFFICCOM HOLDING CORP.,

Appellees

2017-1228, 2017-1229

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2015-00818, IPR2015-00819.

JUDGMENT

ROBERT H. SLOSS, Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves and Savitch LLP, Palo Alto, CA, argued for appellant. Also represented by VICTOR FELIX, San Diego, CA. NATHAN S. MAMMEN, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Washington, DC, argued for appellees. Also represented by GREGG F. LOCASCIO.

2THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (LOURIE, CLEVENGER, and STOLL, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT June 6, 2018 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner 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

Neology, Inc. v. Kapsch Trafficcom Ivhs Inc., No. 17-1228 (Fed. Cir. June 6, 2018).

Record ID
CAFC-17-1228-20180606
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-17-1228-20180606

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