Gammino v. Southwestern Bell Telephone L.P.

Federal Circuit

Gammino v. Southwestern Bell Telephone L.P.

267 F. App'x 949

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit·Decided February 27, 2008·No. No. 2007-1257·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In a thorough opinion, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas held that the asserted claims of the two patents at issue in this litigation, U.S. Pat. No. 5,809,125 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,812,-650, are anticipated by prior art and therefore are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). We affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s opinion. No purpose would be served by simply retracing the analysis of the district court, which is fully sufficient to resolve this appeal. In light of our disposition of the invalidity claim, we need not address the district court’s ruling on the motion for summary judgment of non-infringement.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

In a thorough opinion, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas held that the asserted claims of the two patents at issue in this litigation, U.S. Pat. No. 5,809,125 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,812,-650, are anticipated by prior art and therefore are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). We affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s opinion. No purpose would be served by simply retracing the analysis of the district court, which is fully sufficient to resolve this appeal. In light of our disposition of the invalidity claim, we need not address the district court’s ruling on the motion for summary judgment of non-infringement.

Gammino v. Southwestern Bell Telephone L.P., 267 F. App'x 949 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

Pincite

267 F. App'x 949 (Gammino v. Southwestern Bell Telephone L.P.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related