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.

Location Based Services, LLC v. Niantic, Inc., No. 18-1464 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 9, 2018)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 18-1464
Decided
November 9, 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 LOCATION BASED SERVICES, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

NIANTIC, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee

2018-1464

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 5:17-cv-04413-NC, Magistrate Judge Nathanael M. Cousins.

JUDGMENT

NEAL MASSAND, Ni, Wang & Massand, PLLC, Dallas, TX, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by STEVENSON MOORE V.

DARIN W. SNYDER, O’Melveny & Myers LLP, San Francisco, CA, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by LUANN LORAINE SIMMONS; BRADLEY GARCIA, Washington, DC.

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

PER CURIAM (LOURIE, DYK, and TARANTO, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

November 9, 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

Location Based Services, LLC v. Niantic, Inc., No. 18-1464 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 9, 2018).

Record ID
CAFC-18-1464-20181109
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-18-1464-20181109

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