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

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Headwater Research LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al, No. 2:23-cv-00379 (E.D. Tex. July 24, 2025)

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. 2:23-cv-00379, Dkt. No. 354
Decided
July 24, 2025
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations for 309 Report and Recommendations
Length
2 pages

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC, §

§ §

Plaintiff,

§ §

CASE NO. 2:23-CV-00379-JRG-RSP v.

§

(LEAD CASE)

§

T-MOBILE USA, INC. and SPRINT

§

CORP.,

§ §

Defendants. §

ORDER

Defendants T-Mobile USA, Inc. and Sprint Corp. previously filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Under Rule 12(c) that the Asserted Claims are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101. (Dkt. No. 185.) Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Report and Recommendation recommending denial of T-Mobile and Sprint’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Under Rule 12(c) that the Asserted Claims are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101. (Dkt. No. 309.) T-Mobile and Sprint have now filed Objections (Dkt. No. 331), with Headwater Research LLC filing a Response (Dkt. No. 342). After conducting a de novo review of the briefing on the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Under Rule 12(c) that the Asserted Claims are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, the Report and Recommendation, and the briefing on T-Mobile and Sprint’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 clearly erroneous. Consequently, the Court OVERRULES T-Mobile and Sprint’s Objections, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation, and ORDERS that the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

2.

Under Rule 12(c) that the Asserted Claims are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Dkt. No. 185) is DENIED.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 24th day of July, 2025.

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

Headwater Research LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al, No. 2:23-cv-00379 (E.D. Tex. July 24, 2025).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_23-cv-00379-13
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_23-cv-00379-13

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.