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.

GREE, Inc v. Supercell Oy, No. 2:19-cv-00070 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 21, 2020)

Denied
Summary Judgment Non-Infringement
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:19-cv-00070, Dkt. No. 399
Decided
August 21, 2020
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 335 Report and Recommendations re 196 Sealed Motion for Summary Judgment of No Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,774,655, filed by SUPERCELL OY
Length
1 page
Patents at issueU.S. Patent No. 9,774,655
Download Opinion (PDF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

GREE, INC., § §

Plaintiff, § §

v. § Case No. 2:19-cv-00070-JRG-RSP § SUPERCELL OY, § §

Defendant. §

ORDER

Defendant Supercell filed a Motion for Summary Judgment of No Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,774,655. (Dkt. No. 196). Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 335), recommending denial of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant has now filed Objections (Dkt. No. 353) to the Report and Recommendation, with Plaintiff GREE, Inc. filing a Response. (Dkt. No. 370.) .

After conducting a de novo review of the briefing on the Motion to Amend, the Report and Recommendation, and the briefing on Defendant’s Objections, the Court agrees with the reasoning provided within the Report and Recommendation and concludes that the Objections fail to show that the Report and Recommendation was erroneous. Consequently, the Court OVERRULES Defendant’s Objections (Dkt. No. 353) and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 335), denying the Motion (Dkt. No. 196).

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 21st day of August, 2020.

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

GREE, Inc v. Supercell Oy, No. 2:19-cv-00070 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 21, 2020).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_19-cv-00070-11
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_19-cv-00070-11

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