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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Finjan Inc. v. Symantec Corp., No. 13-1682 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 15, 2014)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 13-1682
Decided
September 15, 2014
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

FINJAN INC., a Delaware corporation,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

SYMANTEC CORP., a Delaware corporation, WEBSENSE INC., a Delaware corporation, AND SOPHOS INC., a Massachusetts corporation,

Defendants-Appellees.

2013-1682

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in No. 1:10-CV-00593-GMS, Chief Judge Gregory M. Sleet.

JUDGMENT

PAUL J. ANDRE, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, of Menlo Park, California, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were LISA KOBIALKA and JAMES HANNAH; and AARON M. FRANKEL of New York, New York. Of counsel on the brief was JEFFREY M. HARRIS, Bancroft PLLC, of Washington, DC.

2DAVID A. NELSON, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, of San Francisco, California, and SEAN C. CUNNINGHAM, DLA Piper LLP, of San Diego, California, argued for defendants-appellees. On the brief for Symantec Corp. were JENNIFER A. KASH, SEAN S. PAK and DAVID A. NELSON, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, of San Francisco, California. On the brief for Websense, Inc. were ANTHONY M. STIEGLER and LORI R. MASON, of Cooley LLP, of San Diego, California. Of then brief for Sophos Inc. were JOHN ALLCOCK, SEAN C. CUNNINGHAM, STANLEY J. PANIKOWSKI, and KATHRYN RILEY GRASSO, DLA Piper LLP, of San Diego, California.

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

REYNA, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

September 15, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of 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

Finjan Inc. v. Symantec Corp., No. 13-1682 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 15, 2014).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-13-01682-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-13-01682-0

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.