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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Synopsys, Inc. v. Ricoh Company, Ltd., No. 12-1522 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 12, 2013)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 12-1522
Decided
March 12, 2013
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

IN RE RICOH COMPANY, LTD. PATENT

LITIGATION

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

SYNOPSYS, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

RICOH COMPANY, LTD.,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

RICOH COMPANY, LTD.,

Plaintiff,

v.

AEROFLEX INCORPORATED, AMI

SEMICONDUCTOR, INC., MATROX ELECTRONIC

SYSTEMS, LTD., MATROX GRAPHICS, INC.,

MATROX INTERNATIONAL, INC., MATROX TECH, INC., AND AEROFLEX COLORADO SPRINGS, INC.,

Defendants.

2012-1522

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 03-CV-2289, Judge James Ware.

2JUDGMENT

RICHARD G. FRENKEL, Latham & Watkins, LLP, of Menlo Park, California, argued for plaintiff-appellee. With him on the brief was RON E. SHULMAN.

KENNETH W. BROTHERS, Dickstein Shapiro LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellant. With him on the brief were GARY M. HOFFMAN; and KRISTA M. CARTER, of Palo Alto, California. Of counsel was ASSAD H. RAJANI, of Palo Alto, California.

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

es).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

March 12, 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date Jan Horbaly Clerk

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

Synopsys, Inc. v. Ricoh Company, Ltd., No. 12-1522 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 12, 2013).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-12-01522-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-12-01522-0

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.