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.

Valeo North America, Inc. v. Schaeffler Technologies, No. 18-1196 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 15, 2019)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 18-1196
Decided
January 15, 2019
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 VALEO NORTH AMERICA, INC., VALEO

EMBRAYAGES,

Appellants

v.

SCHAEFFLER TECHNOLOGIES AG & CO. KG,

Cross-Appellant

2018-1196, 2018-1228

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2016-00502.

JUDGMENT

ROBERT CARTER MATTSON, Oblon LLP, Alexandria, VA, argued for appellants. Also represented by TIA FENTON, LISA MANDRUSIAK, PHILIPPE J.C. SIGNORE.

JUSTIN J. OLIVER, Venable LLP, Washington, DC, argued for cross-appellant. Also represented by STEPHEN KAI-TUNG YAM.

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

PER CURIAM (REYNA, SCHALL, and HUGHES, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

January 15, 2019 /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

Valeo North America, Inc. v. Schaeffler Technologies, No. 18-1196 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 15, 2019).

Record ID
CAFC-18-1196-20190115
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-18-1196-20190115

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