Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E.D. Tex.

Traxcell Technologies, LLC v. AT&T, Inc. et al, No. 2:17-cv-00718 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 29, 2022)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:17-cv-00718, Dkt. No. 519
Decided
March 29, 2022
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM ORDER re 475 Opposed SEALED MOTION for Attorneys' Fees filed by Sprint Communications Company, LP, Sprint Solutions, Inc., Sprint Spectrum, LP
Length
11 pages

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Before the Court is the Motion for Attorneys’ Fees filed by Sprint Communications Company, LP, and Sprint Solutions, Inc. (collectively, “Sprint”). Dkt. No. 475. Having considered the briefing, Sprint’s motion is GRANTED IN PART. I. Background On October 31, 2017, Plaintiff Traxcell Technologies, LLC filed its complaint, which alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No s. 8,977,284 (the “’284 Patent”), 9,510,320 (the “’320 Patent), 9,642,024 (the “’024 Patent) (the “Network Tuning Patents”), and U.S. Pat. No.