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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Riggs Technology Holdings, LLC v. Vagaro, Inc., No. 22-1469 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 17, 2023)

Dismissed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 22-1469
Decided
January 17, 2023
Judge
Chen, J.
Document
Nonprecedential Opinion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit

RIGGS TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

VAGARO, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee

2022-1469

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 3:21-cv-07927-TSH, Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson.

Decided: January 17, 2023

WILLIAM PETERSON RAMEY, III, Ramey LLP, Houston, TX, for plaintiff-appellant. SAL LIM, Kramer Day Alberti Lim Tonkovich & Belloli LLP, Burlingame, CA, for defendant-appellee. Also represented by MARC BELLOLI, HONG LIN.

Before TARANTO, CHEN, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.

22 RIGGS TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS, LLC v. VAGARO, INC.

Riggs Technology Holdings, LLC appeals from a decision by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California holding that all claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,299,067 (’067 patent) are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. See Riggs Tech. Holdings, LLC v. Vagaro, Inc., No. 21-cv-07927-TSH, 2022 WL 74179, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 7, 2022). Our decision today in a separate case, Riggs Technology Holdings, LLC v. Cengage Learning, Inc., No. 22-1468, affirmed a decision by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts that also held that all claims of the ’067 patent are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Our decision in case No. 22-1468 has thus resolved the patent eligibility of the claims on appeal. See BTG Int’l Ltd. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC, 923 F.3d 1063, 1076–77 (Fed. Cir. 2019). We therefore dismiss this appeal as moot.

DISMISSED

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

Riggs Technology Holdings, LLC v. Vagaro, Inc., No. 22-1469 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 17, 2023).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-22-01469-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-22-01469-0

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.