IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
ASUS TECHNOLOGY LICENSING §
INC., et al, §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§ CASE NO. 2:23-CV-00486-JRG-RSP v. § (Lead Case)
§
AT&T CORP., et al, §
§
Defendants. §
ORDER
ASUSTeK Computer Inc. previously filed a Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims Against ASUSTeK (Dkt. No. 102.) Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 377), recommending denial of ASUSTeK’s Motion to Dismiss in all respects except for ASUSTeK’s motion to dismiss Defendants’ non-infringement counterclaims I–IV. ASUSTeK has now filed Objections (Dkt. No. 392.)
After conducting a de novo review of the briefing on the Motion to Dismiss, the Report and Recommendation, and the briefing on ASUSTeK’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 ASUSTeK’s Objections and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and orders that the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 102) is DENIED except as to Counterclaims I–IV.
It is ORDERED that Defendants’ Counterclaims I–IV are DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
2.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 31st day of March, 2025.