From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tech. Patents LLC v. T-Mobile (UK) Ltd.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Feb 10, 2012
2011-1581 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2012)

Opinion

2011-1581

02-10-2012

TECHNOLOGY PATENTS LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T-MOBILE (UK) LTD., T-MOBILE AUSTRIA GMBH, T-MOBILE CZECH REPUBLIC A.S., T-MOBILE DEUTSCHLAND GMBH, T-MOBILE HUNGARY CO. LTD., T-MOBILE NETHERLANDS B. v. , AND T-MOBILE SLOVENSKO A.S., Defendants-Appellees, AND ADVANCED INFO SERVICE PLC, ALSO KNOWN AS AIS, BELL MOBILITY INC., CSL NEW WORLD MOBILITY LIMITED, CHINA MOBILE PEOPLES TELEPHONE COMPANY LIMITED, NOW KNOWN AS CHINA MOBILE HONG KONG COMPANY LIMITED, KT FREETEL CO. LTD., NOW KNOWN AS KT CORPORATION, SINGAPORE TELECOM MOBILE PRIVATE LIMITED, SINGAPORE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED, ALSO KNOWN AS SINGTEL, SINGTEL OPTUS PTY LIMITED, STARHUB MOBILE PTE LTD., AND TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED, Defendants-Appellees, AND AMERICA MOVIL, S.A.B. DE C. v. , CLARO, S.A., AMX ARGENTINA, S.A., and RADIOMOVIL DIPSA, S.A. DE C. v. , ALSO KNOWN AS TELCEL, Defendants-Appellees, AND BELGACOM MOBILE S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS PROXIMUS, MOBILKOM AUSTRIA AG, SFR, ALSO KNOWN AS SOCIETE FRANCAISE DE RADIOTELEPHONE S.A., SMARTONE MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED, TANGO S.A., VODAFONE CZECH REPUBLIC A.S., VODAFONE D2 GMBH, ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE GERMANY, VODAFONE ESPANA S.A., VODAFONE ESSAR LTD., VODAFONE HUNGARY MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD., VODAFONE IRELAND LTD., VODAFONE LIBERTEL B. v. , VODAFONE LIMITED, ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE UK, VODAFONE NETWORK PTY. LTD., VODAFONE NEW ZEALAND, VODAFONE OMNITEL N. v. , VODAFONE PORTUGAL, COMUNICACOES PESSOAIS, S.A., VODAFONE TELEKOMUNIKASYON A.S., ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE TURKEY, AND VODAFONE-PANAFON HELLENIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE-PANAFON S.A., Defendants-Appellees, AND TNL PCS S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS OI, Defendant-Appellee, AND BASE N. v. /S.A., E-PLUS MOBILFUNK GMBH & CO. KG, and KPN B. v. , Defendants-Appellees, AND BERMUDA DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS LTD., Defendant-Appellee, AND BOUYGUES TELECOM S.A., Defendant-Appellee, AND CHUNGHWA TELECOM CO. LTD., FAR EASTONE TELCOMMUNICATIONS CO. LTD., and TAIWAN MOBILE CO., LTD., Defendants-Appellees, AND CLICKATELL (PTY) LTD., Defendant-Appellee, AND FRANCE TELECOM ESPANA S.A., ALSO-KNOWN AS ORANGE SPAIN, FRANCE TELECOM S.A., MOBISTAR N. v. , ORANGE AUSTRIA TELECOMMUNICATION GMBH, FORMERLY KNOWN AS ONE GMBH, ORANGE COMMUNICATIONS S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS ORANGE SWITZERLAND, ORANGE FRANCE S.A., ORANGE PLC, ALSO KNOWN AS ORANGE U.K., ORANGE S.A., ORANGE SLOVENSKO A.S., AND VOX MOBILE S.A., Defendants-Appellees, AND H3G S.P.A., ALSO KNOWN AS 3 ITALIA, HUTCHISON 3G AUSTRIA GMBH, HUTCHISON 3G UK LIMITED, AND HUTCHISON TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HONG KONG) LIMITED, Defendants-Appellees, AND KDDI CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee, AND PCCW MOBILE HK LIMITED, Defendant-Appellee, AND YAHOO! INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND KABUSHIKI KAISHA NTT DOCOMO and SOFTBANK MOBILE CORP., Defendants-Appellees, AND M3 WIRELESS LTD., Defendant-Appellee, AND NETCOM AS, NOW KNOWN AS TELIASONERA NORGE AS AND TELIA DANMARK A/S, Defendants-Appellees, AND TMN-TELECOMUNICACOES MOVEIS NACIONAIS, S.A., Defendant-Appellee, AND 02 (GERMANY) GMBH & CO. OHG, 02 (UK) LIMITED, 02 COMMUNICATIONS (IRELAND) LTD., PEGASO PCS, S.A. DE C. v. , TELEFONICA MOVILES ARGENTINA, S.A., TELEFONICA MOVILES ESPANA, S.A.U., TELEFONICA MOVILES MEXICO, S.A. DE C. v. , TELEFONICA 02 CZECH REPUBLIC, A.S., TELEFONICA 02 EUROPE PLC, ALSO KNOWN AS 02 PLC, TELEFONICA, S.A., VIVO PARTICIPATES, S.A., AND VIVO, S.A., Defendants-Appellees, AND PANNON GSM TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD., SONOFON A/S, SWISSCOM MOBILE A.G., TDC A/S, TDC SWITZERLAND AG, ALSO KNOWN AS SUNRISE, TELENOR MOBIL A.S., AND TOTAL ACCESS COMMUNICATION PLC, ALSO KNOWN AS DTAC, Defendants-Appellees, AND SONAECOM-SERVICOS DE COMUNICACOES, S.A., Defendant-Appellee, AND TELECOM ITALIA S.PA., TELECOM PERSONAL S.A., TIM CELULAR S.A., AND TIM PARTICIPATES S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS TIM BRAZIL, Defendants-Appellees, AND TRUE MOVE COMPANY LIMITED, Defendant-Appellee, AND WIND HELLAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS S.A. AND WIND TELECOMUNICAZIONI SPA, Defendants-Appellees, AND AVEAILETISIM HIZMETLERI A.S., Defendant-Appellee, AND T-MOBILE USA, INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND AT&T MOBILITY LLC, Defendant-Appellee, AND TELE-MOBILE COMPANY, ALSO KNOWN AS TELUS MOBILITY, Defendant-Appellee, AND ROGERS WIRELESS PARTNERSHIP, Defendant-Appellee, AND MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee, AND PALM, INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, DOING BUSINESS AS VERIZON WIRELESS, Defendant-Appellee, AND HELIO, LLC and SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION, Defendants-Appellees, AND LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND MOTOROLA, INC., NOW KNOWN AS MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED, Defendant-Appellee, AND DEUTSCHE TELEKOM AG, MOBILEONE LTD., ORANGE LIMITED, ORANGE NEDERLAND N. v. , TURKCELL ILETISIM HIZMETLERI A.S., AND UPSIDE WIRELESS INC., ALSO KNOWN AS IPIPI, Defendants, AND MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., Intervener.


NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland in case no. 07-CV-3012, Judge Alexander Williams, Jr.

ON MOTION


ORDER

America Movil, SA.B. de C.V., Claro, S.A., AMX Argentina, S.A., and Radiomovil DIPSA, S.A. de C.V. move to substitute Steven R. Selsberg as principal attorney and to designate Sharon A. Israel as of counsel.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is granted.

FOR THE COURT

Jan Horbaly

Clerk
cc: Bryant C. Boren, Jr., Esq.

Doris Johnson Hines, Esq.

Sharon A. Israel, Esq.

Matthew J. Moore, Esq.

Ian N. Feinberg, Esq.

Roderick R. McKelvie, Esq.

Louis M. Solomon, Esq.

Kevin P. Anderson, Esq.

Brian Wm. Higgins, Esq.

Stefani E. Shanberg, Esq.

Stuart J. Sinder, Esq.

James W. Dabney, Esq.

Stephen B. Kinnaird, Esq.

Brian M. Koide, Esq.

William H. Burgess, Esq.

Deanne E. Maynard, Esq.

Michael J. McKeon, Esq.

Robert C. Bertin, Esq.

George F. Pappas, Esq.

Jonathan E. Retsky, Esq.

Stephen S. Madsen, Esq.

Kevin Walsh, Esq.

Russell E. Levine, Esq.

Michael M. Markman, Esq.

Robert C. Nissen, Esq.

Edward Han, Esq.

Brian C. Riopelle, Esq.

Ramsey M. Al-Salam, Esq.

David L. Leichtman, Esq.

Andrew R. Sommer, Esq.

Joseph A. Rhoa, Esq.

Maximilian A. Grant, Esq.

Jay F. Utley, Esq.

Adam Gahtan, Esq.

Adam R. Alper, Esq.

Scott R. Matthews, Esq.

Steven Jay Young, Esq.

Victor Siber, Esq.

Steven R. Selsberg, Esq.
s8


Summaries of

Tech. Patents LLC v. T-Mobile (UK) Ltd.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Feb 10, 2012
2011-1581 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2012)
Case details for

Tech. Patents LLC v. T-Mobile (UK) Ltd.

Case Details

Full title:TECHNOLOGY PATENTS LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T-MOBILE (UK) LTD.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Date published: Feb 10, 2012

Citations

2011-1581 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2012)