Late yesterday, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal. This morning, the court released two nonprecedential opinions, another nonprecedential order dismissing an appeal, and three Rule 36 judgments. One of the nonprecedential opinions comes in an appeal of a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, while the other comes in a pro se appeal of a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Here are the introductions to the opinions and links to the Rule 36 judgments and dismissals.
Universal Electronics, Inc. v. Roku, Inc. (Nonprecedential)
Universal Electronics Inc. (“UEI”) appeals a final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) in an inter partes review brought by Roku, Inc. (“Roku”). The Board determined that claims 1–7, 9–13, 15, and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 10,930,276 (“the ’276 patent”) are unpatentable as obvious. Roku, Inc. v. Universal Elecs., Inc., No. IPR2022-00943, 2023 WL 8242606, at *17 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 28, 2023) (“Decision”). For the reasons below, we affirm.
Lopez v. Collins (Nonprecedential)
Guadalupe Lopez, Jr. appeals a decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”) affirming a dismissal by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (“Board”) of his motion to revise an earlier Board order due to clear and unmistakable error (“CUE”). Because the Veterans Court did not err in determining Mr. Lopez was legally barred from bringing a CUE claim as to the order he sought to revise, we affirm.
Rule 36 Judgment
- Ideahub Inc. v. Unified Patents, LLC
- Lemko Corp. v. Microsoft Corp.
- Sentient Sensors LLC v. Xilinx, Inc.