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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

LU v. Hyper Bicycles, Inc., No. 24-1081 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2025)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 24-1081
Decided
February 10, 2025
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

FA-HSING LU,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

HYPER BICYCLES, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee

2024-1081

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts in No. 1:20-cv-11739-NMG, Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton.

JUDGMENT

CHRISTOPHER E. HULTQUIST, Hultquist Law, P.C., Providence, RI, argued for plaintiff-appellant. LAWRENCE ECOFF, Ecoff Campain Tilles & Kay, LLP, Beverly Hills, CA, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by DAVID WILSON, Thompson Hine LLP, Washington, DC. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

2ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

CUNNINGHAM, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

Figure on page 2 of the opinion

February 10, 2025

Date

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

LU v. Hyper Bicycles, Inc., No. 24-1081 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2025).

Record ID
CAFC-24-1081-20250210
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-24-1081-20250210

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.