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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Advanced Audio Devices, LLC v. HTC Corporation, No. 17-1748 (Fed. Cir. May 7, 2018)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 17-1748
Decided
May 7, 2018
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit ADVANCED AUDIO DEVICES, LLC,

Appellant

v.

HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA, INC.,

Appellees

2017-1748, 2017-1750, 2017-1805, 2017-1806, 2017-1824

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2014-01154, IPR2014-01155, IPR2014-01156, IPR2014-01157, IPR2014-01158.

JUDGMENT

JOHN STEVEN PANIAGUAS, Clark Hill PLC, Chicago, IL, argued for appellant. Also represented by JAMES R. FOLEY, TIMOTHY M. MCCARTHY; ROBERT GREENSPOON, Flachsbart & Greenspoon, LLC, Chicago, IL. MATTHEW COOK BERNSTEIN, Perkins Coie, LLP, San Diego, CA, argued for appellees. Also represented by EVAN SKINNER DAY; DAN L. BAGATELL, Hanover, NH.

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

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT May 7, 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

Advanced Audio Devices, LLC v. HTC Corporation, No. 17-1748 (Fed. Cir. May 7, 2018).

Record ID
CAFC-17-1748-20180507
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-17-1748-20180507

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.