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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

T.M. Patents v. Cisco Systems, No. 14-1161 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 8, 2014)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 14-1161
Decided
August 8, 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 T.M. PATENTS, L.P., AND T.M. CREDITORS LLC,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

2014-1161

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts in No. 1:12-cv-11418-WGY, Judge William G. Young.

JUDGMENT

STEPHEN J. DRISCOLL, Saul Ewing, LLP, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, argued for plaintiffs-appellants. Of counsel was JOEY TSU-YI CHEN, of Baltimore, Maryland.

J. ANTHONY DOWNS, Goodwin Procter LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were DANIEL M. FORMAN and LANA S. SHIFERMAN. Of counsel on the brief were JOHN C. O’QUINN and JASON M. WILCOX, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, of Washington, DC.

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

TARANTO, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT August 8, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court

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

T.M. Patents v. Cisco Systems, No. 14-1161 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 8, 2014).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-14-01161-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-14-01161-0

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.