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

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Metacluster LT, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd., No. 2:22-cv-00011 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 7, 2024)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:22-cv-00011, Dkt. No. 340
Decided
March 7, 2024
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 114 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Metacluster LT, UAB
Length
1 page

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

METACLUSTER LT, UAB §

§

Plaintiff, § §

v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:22-cv-0011-JRG-RSP § BRIGHT DATA LTD., § §

Defendant. §

ORDER

Metacluster LT, UAB ("Metacluster") previously filed a Motion to Dismiss (the "Motion"). (Dkt. No. 114.) Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 156), recommending denial of Metacluster’s Motion to Dismiss. Metacluster has now filed Objections (Dkt. No. 162). .

After conducting a de novo review of the briefing on the Motion, the Report and Recommendation, and the briefing on Metacluster’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 Metacluster’s Objections and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and orders that the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 114) is DENIED.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 7th day of March, 2024.

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

Metacluster LT, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd., No. 2:22-cv-00011 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 7, 2024).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_22-cv-00011-2
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_22-cv-00011-2

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.