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.

In re Parallax Group International, No. 20-2078 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 2, 2021)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 20-2078
Decided
September 2, 2021
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

IN RE: PARALLAX GROUP INTERNATIONAL,

LLC,

Appellant

2020-2078

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 90/013,852, 90/014,126.

JUDGMENT

JOHN DAVID VAN LOBEN SELS, Fish IP Law, LLP, Irvine, CA, argued for appellant Parallax Group International, LLC. Also represented by JENNIFER SHIH.

PETER JOHN SAWERT, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for appellee Andrew Hirshfeld. Also represented by MARY L. KELLY, THOMAS W. KRAUSE, AMY J. NELSON, FARHEENA YASMEEN RASHEED.

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

2PER CURIAM (TARANTO, HUGHES, and STOLL, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

September 2, 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

In re Parallax Group International, No. 20-2078 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 2, 2021).

Record ID
CAFC-20-2078-20210902
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-20-2078-20210902

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