Fed. Cir.

Ameranth, Inc. v. OLO Inc., No. 21-1211 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 8, 2021)

Rule 36 Affirmance

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.: No. 21-1211
Decided: October 8, 2021
Judge: Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document: Rule 36 Judgment
Length: 2 pages

Full Text Analysis Cite this Opinion

Download Opinion (PDF)

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit

AMERANTH, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant

OLO INC.,

Defendant-Appellee

2021-1211

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in No. 1:20-cv-00518-LPS, Judge Leonard P. Stark.

JUDGMENT

RICHARD CHARLES WEINBLATT, Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC, Wilmington, DE, argued for plaintiff-appellant. HEIDI LYN KEEFE, Cooley LLP, Palo Alto, CA, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by LOWELL D. MEAD.

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

2ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (MOORE, Chief Judge, PROST and

TARANTO, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner October 8, 2021 Peter R. Marksteiner

Date 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

Ameranth, Inc. v. OLO Inc., No. 21-1211 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 8, 2021).

Record ID: CAFC-21-1211-20211008
Permalink: https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-21-1211-20211008

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