Patent Case Watch

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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Enovsys LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, No. 16-1691 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 10, 2017)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 16-1691
Also Docketed
No. 16-1767 (consolidated; same document)
Decided
March 10, 2017
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages
Download Opinion (PDF)

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

ENOVSYS LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

AT&T MOBILITY LLC, AT&T MOBILITY II LLC,

Defendants-Cross-Appellants

2016-1691, 2016-1767

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in No. 2:11-cv-05210-SS, Magistrate Judge Suzanne H. Segal.

JUDGMENT

BRUCE G. CHAPMAN, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP, Los Angeles, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

MICHAEL HAWES, Baker Botts, LLP, Houston, TX, argued for defendants-cross-appellants. Also represented by BRYANT C. BOREN, JR., ELIOT DAMON WILLIAMS, Palo Alto, CA; TIMOTHY S. DURST, BRIAN DOUGLAS JOHNSTON, Dallas, TX.

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

PER CURIAM (DYK, O’MALLEY, and WALLACH, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT March 10, 2017 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner 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

Enovsys LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, No. 16-1691 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 10, 2017).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-16-01691-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-16-01691-0

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