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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Healthestate, LLC v. US, No. 20-137 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 29, 2020)

Denied
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 20-137
Decided
September 29, 2020
Judge
Per curiam
Document
Nonprecedential Opinion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit

HEALTHESTATE, LLC,

Plaintiff-Respondent

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant

ASM RESEARCH, LLC,

Defendant-Petitioner

2020-137

On Petition for Permission to Appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1292(d)(2) from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:18-cv-00034-DAT, Judge David A. Tapp.

ON PETITION

Before NEWMAN, LOURIE, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.

O R D E R

22 HEALTHESTATE, LLC v. US

ASM Research, LLC petitions for permission to appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(d)(2) from the interlocutory order denying its motion to dismiss certified by the United States Court of Federal Claims. HEALTHeSTATE, LLC (“HeS”) opposes the petition. The United States submits a brief amicus curiae in response to this court’s August 10, 2020 order. ASM moves for leave to file a reply in support of its petition and a response to the United States’ brief, each of which HeS opposes. Under the express language of § 1292(d)(2), this court has “discretion” whether to “permit an appeal” under the provision. See Digit. Equip. Corp. v. Desktop Direct, Inc., 511 U.S. 863, 883 n.9 (1994) (noting “broad” discretion under the similar provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) for interlocutory appeals from United States district courts). Having considered the matter, we decline to permit interlocutory review here. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The petition for permission to appeal is denied. (2) The motion for leave to file a reply is granted. The reply, ECF No. 18-2, is accepted for filing. (3) The motion for leave to file a response to the United States’ brief is granted. The response, ECF No. 25-2, is accepted for filing.

FOR THE COURT

September 29, 2020 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Date Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court

s35

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

Healthestate, LLC v. US, No. 20-137 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 29, 2020).

Record ID
CAFC-20-137-20200929
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-20-137-20200929

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.