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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Singapore Asahi Chemical v. Apple Inc., No. 20-2051 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 8, 2021)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 20-2051
Decided
April 8, 2021
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 SINGAPORE ASAHI CHEMICAL & SOLDER

INDUSTRIES PTE LTD.,

Appellant

v.

APPLE INC.,

Appellee

2020-2051

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2019-00377.

JUDGMENT

JUDE ANN FRY, Fay Sharpe LLP, Cleveland, OH, argued for appellant. Also represented by BRENDAN JAMES GOODWINE.

CAROLYN CHANG, Marton Ribera Schumann & Chang LLP, San Francisco, CA, argued for appellee. Also represented by RYAN J. MARTON, HECTOR JULIAN RIBERA.

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

April 8, 2021 /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

Singapore Asahi Chemical v. Apple Inc., No. 20-2051 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 8, 2021).

Record ID
CAFC-20-2051-20210408
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-20-2051-20210408

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.