Patent Case Watch

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

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. apple, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-01366 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 29, 2016)

Adopted Report and recommendation (or magistrate's order) adopted
§ 101 Eligibility Motion to Dismiss
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:15-cv-01366, Dkt. No. 230
Decided
September 29, 2016
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 209 Report and Recommendations
Length
1 page
Download Opinion (PDF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

PERSONALIZED MEDIA §

COMMUNICATIONS, LLC § §

Plaintiff, § §

v. § Case No. 2:15-cv-01366-JRG-RSP

§ (Lead Case)

APPLE INC., § §

Defendants. §

ORDER

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne (Dkt. No. 209) recommending that Apple Inc.’s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Dkt. Nos. 14, 34) be denied because the asserted patents are directed to patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Finding no objections, and reviewing the record de novo, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation should be ADOPTED. Accordingly, Defendant’s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Dkt. Nos. 14, 34) is DENIED.

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

Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. apple, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-01366 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 29, 2016).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_15-cv-01366-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_15-cv-01366-0

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

Other documents in this case