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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Uniloc 2017 LLC. v. Google LLC, No. 22-1031 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 12, 2023)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 22-1031
Decided
January 12, 2023
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

UNILOC 2017 LLC.,

Appellant

v.

GOOGLE LLC,

Appellee

2022-1031

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2020-00463.

JUDGMENT

DONALD LEE JACKSON, Davidson Berquist Jackson & Gowdey, LLP, McLean, VA, argued for appellant. Also represented by JAMES ETHERIDGE, RYAN S. LOVELESS, Etheridge Law Group, Southlake, TX. SYDNEY KESTLE, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC, argued for appellee. Also represented by ERIKA ARNER; CORY C. BELL, Boston, MA.

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

January 12, 2023 /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

Uniloc 2017 LLC. v. Google LLC, No. 22-1031 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 12, 2023).

Record ID
CAFC-22-1031-20230112
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-22-1031-20230112

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.