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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

One Source Technology v. Robert DiFilippo, No. 12-1668 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2013)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 12-1668
Decided
May 13, 2013
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 ONE SOURCE TECHNOLOGY, LLC,

(doing business as Asurint),

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

ROBERT DIFILIPPO,

Defendant-Cross Appellant.

2012-1668, -1669

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio in No. 10-CV-0860, Judge Donald C. Nugent.

JUDGMENT

JONATHAN T. HYMAN, Kohrman Jackson & Krantz P.L.L., of Cleveland, Ohio, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was SEAN P. MALONE.

WAYNE D. PORTER, JR., Law Offices of Wayne D. Porter, Jr., of Cleveland, Ohio, argued for defendant-cross appellant.

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 May 13, 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

One Source Technology v. Robert DiFilippo, No. 12-1668 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2013).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-12-01668-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-12-01668-0

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.