Patent Case Watch

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

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Smartflash LLC et al v. apple Inc, et al, No. 6:13-cv-00447 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 13, 2015)

Adopted Report and recommendation (or magistrate's order) adopted
Summary Judgment Invalidity (§ 102/§ 103)
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division
Case No.
No. 6:13-cv-00447, Dkt. No. 487
Decided
February 13, 2015
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 388 Report and Recommendations, and denying Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment Regarding Invalidity Under Sections 102, 103 (6:13CV447, 270; 6:13CV448, Doc. No. 325)
Length
2 pages
Download Opinion (PDF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

TYLER DIVISION

SMARTFLASH LLC, et al., § § Plaintiffs, § CASE NO. 6:13cv447-JRG-KNM § v. § § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

APPLE INC., et al., § § Defendants. § § SMARTFLASH LLC, et al., § § Plaintiffs, § CASE NO. 6:13cv448-JRG-KNM v. § § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. § et al., § § Defendants. § §

ORDER

Before the Court are Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment Regarding Invalidity Under Sections 102, 103 (6:13CV447, Doc. Nos. 270; 6:13CV448, Doc. No. 325) and the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (6:13CV447, Doc. No. 388; 6:13CV448; Doc. No. 434) recommending that the Motions be denied. Having considered Defendants’ Objections to the Report and Recommendation Regarding Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment Regarding Invalidity (6:13CV447, Doc. No. 414; 6:13CV448, Doc. No. 448), and having conducted a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation as to which objection was made, and finding no error therein, the Court does hereby adopt the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly,

2IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment Regarding Invalidity Under Sections 102, 103 (6:13CV447, Doc. Nos. 270; 6:13CV448, Doc. No. 325) are DENIED.

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

Smartflash LLC et al v. apple Inc, et al, No. 6:13-cv-00447 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 13, 2015).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-6_13-cv-00447-9
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-6_13-cv-00447-9

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.

Source: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 25, 2026 · Report an error

Other documents in this case