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.

Blast Motion, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 18-1067 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 6, 2018)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 18-1067
Decided
December 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

BLAST MOTION, INC.,

Appellant

v.

ANDREI IANCU, UNDER SECRETARY OF

COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

AND DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES

PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE,

Intervenor

2018-1067, 2018-1069

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2016-00676, IPR2016-00677.

JUDGMENT

MATTHEW A. ARGENTI, Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati, PC, Palo Alto, CA, argued for appellant. Also represented by JAMES C. YOON; JOEL CHRISTIAN BOEHM, Austin, TX; MICHAEL T. ROSATO, Seattle, WA. COKE MORGAN STEWART, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA,

2argued for intervenor. Also represented by THOMAS W. KRAUSE, MOLLY R. SILFEN.

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

PER CURIAM (DYK, REYNA, and TARANTO, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

December 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

Blast Motion, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 18-1067 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 6, 2018).

Record ID
CAFC-18-1067-20181206
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-18-1067-20181206

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