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

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Ultravision Technologies, LLC v. Lamar advertising Company et al, No. 2:16-cv-00374 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 10, 2017)

Adopted Report and recommendation (or magistrate's order) adopted
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:16-cv-00374, Dkt. No. 170
Decided
March 10, 2017
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 161 Report and Recommendations, 66 Motion to Dismiss, filed by The Lamar Company, L.L.C., Lamar Texas Limited Partnership, Lamar Media Corporation, Lamar Advertising Company
Length
1 page

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

ULTRAVISION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, §

§ Plaintiff, § Case No. 2:16-CV-00374-JRG-RSP § v. § § LAMAR ADVERTISING COMPANY et al., § § Defendants. §

§

ORDER

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Payne on February 21, 2017 (Dkt. No. 162) recommending that Lamar’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Dkt. No. 91) be denied. Having considered Lamar’s objections and finding them to be without sufficient merit, and after a de novo review, the Recommendation is ADOPTED.

IT IS ORDERED that Lamar’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 66) 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

Ultravision Technologies, LLC v. Lamar advertising Company et al, No. 2:16-cv-00374 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 10, 2017).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_16-cv-00374-1
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_16-cv-00374-1

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.