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

E.D. Tex.

Uniloc 2017 LLC v. AT&T Services, Inc. et al, No. 2:18-cv-00514 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 23, 2019)

Granted
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:18-cv-00514, Dkt. No. 42
Decided
April 23, 2019
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER- The Court hereby GRANTS Ericssons Motion to Intervene as a Defendant. Ericsson is ORDERED to file its Answer in Intervention within fourteen (14) days of the issuance of this Order
Length
12 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 Ericsson, Inc.’s (“Ericsson”) Motion to Intervene as a Defendant (the “Motion”). (Dkt. No. 20.) Having considered the Motion, briefing, and relevant authorities, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be and hereby is GRANTED for the reasons set forth herein. I. BACKGROUND On November 17, 2018, Plaintiff Uniloc 2017 LLC (“Uniloc”) sued Defendants AT&T Mobility LLC and AT&T Services, Inc. (collectively “AT&T”) for patent infringement. (Dkt. No. 1.) Verizon filed its Answer on January 18, 2019, (Dkt. No.