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.

Innovention Toys, LLC v. MGA Entertainment, Inc., No. 17-2204 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 2018)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 17-2204
Also Docketed
No. 17-2320 (consolidated; same document)
Decided
August 9, 2018
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

INNOVENTION TOYS, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MGA ENTERTAINMENT, INC., WAL-MART

STORES, INC., TOYS "R" US, INC.,

Defendants-Appellants

2017-2204, 2017-2320

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in No. 2:07-cv-06510-SMMBN, Judge Susie Morgan.

JUDGMENT

DAVID A. CAINE, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Palo Alto, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellee. Also represented by THOMAS T. CARMACK. ALLEN MARCEL SOKAL, Baker & Hostetler LLP, Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellants. Also represented by ALAINA J. LAKAWICZ, Philadelphia, PA; BENJAMIN JOHNSON, MGA Entertainment, Inc., Van Nuys, CA.

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

PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, TARANTO and CHEN,

Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

August 9, 2018 /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

Innovention Toys, LLC v. MGA Entertainment, Inc., No. 17-2204 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 2018).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-17-02204-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-17-02204-0

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