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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Fuzzysharp Technologies v. Intel Corporation, No. 14-1261 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 9, 2015)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 14-1261
Decided
March 9, 2015
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

FUZZYSHARP TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

INTEL CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee

2014-1261

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 4:12-cv-04413-YGR, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.

JUDGMENT

DAVID FINK, Fink & Johnson, Houston, TX, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

DAN L. BAGATELL, Perkins Coie LLP, Phoenix, AZ argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by JAMES F. VALENTINE, KENNETH J. HALPERN, Palo Alto, CA; CHRISTINA JORDAN MCCULLOUGH, Seattle, WA. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

2ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT March 9, 2015 /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

Fuzzysharp Technologies v. Intel Corporation, No. 14-1261 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 9, 2015).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-14-01261-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-14-01261-0

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.