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

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Valtrus Innovations Ltd. v. SAP america, Inc. et al, No. 2:24-cv-00021 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 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. 2:24-cv-00021, Dkt. No. 314
Decided
September 24, 2025
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations 300 Motion to Dismiss Member Case 2:24cv533
Length
1 page

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

VALTRUS INNOVATIONS, LTD. and § KEY PATENT INNOVATIONS, LTD., §

§

Plaintiffs,

§ CASE NO. 2:24-CV-00021-JRG-RSP v. §

(Lead Case) §

SAP AMERICA, INC. and SAP, SE,

§

Defendants.

§ §

VALTRUS INNOVATIONS, LTD. and

§

KEY PATENT INNOVATIONS, LTD.,

§

Plaintiffs,

§ CASE NO. 2:24-CV-00533-JRG-RSP v. § (Member Case)

§

SAP AMERICA, INC. and SAP, SE,

§

Defendants. §

ORDER

SAP America, Inc., and SAP, SE (collectively, “Defendants”) previously filed a Motion to Dismiss Under the Duplicative Litigation Doctrine Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (“Motion”). (Dkt. No. 5 (filed in the Member Case No. 2:24-00533 (“Member Case”))). Magistrate Judge Payne . entered a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 300), recommending grant of Defendants’ Motion. Because no objections have been filed and because of the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, the Recommendation is ADOPTED. It is therefore ORDERED that the Motion (Dkt. No. 5 (filed in Member Case)) is GRANTED. Accordingly, all pending requests for relief in the Member Case, No. 2:24-00533, not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the Member Case, No. 2:24-00533. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 24th day of September, 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

Valtrus Innovations Ltd. v. SAP america, Inc. et al, No. 2:24-cv-00021 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 24, 2025).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_24-cv-00021-3
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_24-cv-00021-3

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.