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

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

EireOg Innovations Ltd. v. Cisco Systems Inc., No. 2:24-cv-00224 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 17, 2026)

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-00224, Dkt. No. 485
Decided
April 17, 2026
Judge
Robert W. Schroeder, III, J. — Texarkana
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations for 436 Report and Recommendations,. (Motion(s)207 terminated)
Length
2 pages

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

EIREOG INNOVATIONS LTD., §

§ Plaintiff, § §

v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-CV-224-RWS-RSP

§ *LEAD CASE*

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., §

§ Defendant. §

ORDER

The above-captioned case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Now before the Court is Defendants Cisco Systems, Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment of No Infringement Under the Doctrine of Equivalents. Docket No. 207. On April 6, 2026, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation recommending denial of Defendants’ motion. Docket No. 436. The set deadline for objections to be filed—April 14, 2026—has passed, and no objections have been filed by the parties. Because no objections have been filed, any aggrieved party is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of the Magistrate Judge’s proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Moreover, except upon grounds of plain error, an aggrieved party is barred from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. See Duarte v. City of Lewisville, Texas, 858 F.3d 348, 352 (5th Cir. 2017); Arriaga v. Laxminarayan, Case No. 4:21-CV-00203-RAS, 2021 WL 3287683, at *1 (E.D. Tex. July 31, 2021).

The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this case and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the Report of the2 Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. . denied, 492 U.S. 918 (1989) (where no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”). Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 436) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further

ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of No Infringement Under the Doctrine of Equivalents (Docket No. 207) is DENIED.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 17th day of April, 2026.

ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III

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

EireOg Innovations Ltd. v. Cisco Systems Inc., No. 2:24-cv-00224 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 17, 2026).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_24-cv-00224-6
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_24-cv-00224-6

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.