Fed. Cir.

Engle Grange, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, No. 22-1524 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 4, 2023)

Rule 36 Affirmance

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.: No. 22-1524
Decided: April 4, 2023
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

ENGLE GRANGE, LLC,

Appellant

UNIFIED PATENTS, LLC,

Appellee

2022-1524

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2020-01334.

JUDGMENT

C. DOUGLASS THOMAS, TI Law Group, PC, San Jose, CA, argued for appellant. DAVID C. SEASTRUNK, Unified Patents, LLC, Chevy Chase, MD, argued for appellee. Also represented by MICHELLE ASPEN, ROSHAN MANSINGHANI.

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

2ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (DYK, MAYER, and REYNA, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

April 4, 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

Engle Grange, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, No. 22-1524 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 4, 2023).

Record ID: CAFC-22-1524-20230404
Permalink: https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-22-1524-20230404

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