Fed. Cir.

LightGuard Systems v. Spot Devices, No. 12-1572 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 7, 2013)

Rule 36 Affirmance

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.: No. 12-1572
Decided: March 7, 2013
Judge: Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document: Rule 36 Judgment
Length: 2 pages

Full Text Analysis Cite this Opinion

Download Opinion (PDF)

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMS, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

SPOT DEVICES, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

2012-1572

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada in No. 10-CV-0737, Judge Larry R. Hicks.

JUDGMENT

ADAM P. MCMILLEN, Watson Rounds, PC, of Reno, Nevada, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were MICHAEL D. ROUNDS and STEVEN A. CALOIARO.

STEVEN D. HEMMINGER, Alston and Bird, LLP, of Menlo Park, Colorado, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief was XAVIER M. BRANDWAJN.

2THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (MOORE, REYNA, and WALLACH, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT March 7, 2013 /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

LightGuard Systems v. Spot Devices, No. 12-1572 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 7, 2013).

govinfo ID: USCOURTS-ca13-12-01572-0
Permalink: https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-12-01572-0

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.

Source: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 25, 2026 · Report an error