Today, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion and a nonprecedential order. The opinion addresses an appeal in a patent case in which a district court found patent claims invalid as indefinite. The order denies a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to order a judge of the International Trade Commission to vacate an order preventing a witness from testifying. Here are the introductions to the opinion and the order.
WSOU Investments LLC v. Google LLC (Nonprecedential Opinion)
WSOU Investments LLC, dba Brazos Licensing and Development (“WSOU”) appeals from two final judgments of invalidity of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. In WSOU Investments, LLC dba, Brazos Licensing and Development v. Google LLC, No. 6:20-CV-00581 (W.D. Tex. 2021), the district court granted a joint stipulation of the parties, holding claims 1 and 16 of U.S. Patent 7,304,563 (“the ’563 patent”), among others, invalid as indefinite under the court’s claim construction. J.A. 1, 612–15. Similarly, in WSOU Investments, LLC dba, Brazos Licensing and Development v. Google LLC, No. 6:20-CV-00582 (W.D. Tex. 2021), the district court granted a joint stipulation of the parties, holding claims 1, 9, 16, and 24 of U.S. Patent 8,238,681 (“the ’681 patent”) invalid as indefinite under the court’s claim construction. J.A. 2, 1257–60. For the reasons articulated below, we affirm.
In re Realtek Semiconductor Corp. (Nonprecedential Order)
In the underlying investigation before the United States International Trade Commission (“ITC”), the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) granted Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (“AMD”)’s motion to strike Realtek Semiconductor Corporation’s witness from testifying at an upcoming evidentiary hearing. Realtek now petitions this court for a writ of mandamus directing, among other things, that the ITC’s ALJ vacate that ruling. Realtek also moves to waive the confidentiality requirements of Federal Circuit Rule 25.1(d)(1)(A) with regard to its petition.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The motion to waive the confidentiality requirements is granted to the extent that the non-confidential and confidential versions of the petition for writ of mandamus, ECF Nos. 2 and 3, respectively, are accepted for filing.
(2) The petition for writ of mandamus is denied.