Opinion
2022-1990 2022-1991
04-05-2024
SITO MOBILE R&D IP, LLC, SITO MOBILE, LTD., Appellants v. HULU, LLC,
STEPHEN TERRY SCHREINER, Carmichael Ip, Tysons, VA, argued for appellants. Also represented by JAMES CARMICHAEL, MINGHUI YANG; JASON SCOTT CHARKOW, RONALD M. DAIGNAULT, CHANDRAN IYER, RICHARD JUANG, KEVIN SPRENGER, Daignault Iyer LLP, Vienna, VA. BRETT JOHNSTON WILLIAMSON, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Newport Beach, CA, argued for appellee. Also represented by BRADLEY M. BERG, CAMERON WILLIAM WESTIN; NATHANIEL LEGUM, Los Angeles, CA; AMY LIANG, San Francisco, CA.
This disposition is nonprecedential.
Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2021-00298, IPR2021-00304.
STEPHEN TERRY SCHREINER, Carmichael Ip, Tysons, VA, argued for appellants. Also represented by JAMES CARMICHAEL, MINGHUI YANG; JASON SCOTT CHARKOW, RONALD M. DAIGNAULT, CHANDRAN IYER, RICHARD JUANG, KEVIN SPRENGER, Daignault Iyer LLP, Vienna, VA.
BRETT JOHNSTON WILLIAMSON, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Newport Beach, CA, argued for appellee. Also represented by BRADLEY M. BERG, CAMERON WILLIAM WESTIN;
NATHANIEL LEGUM, Los Angeles, CA; AMY LIANG, San Francisco, CA.
JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
PER CURIAM
DYK, BRYSON, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.
AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.