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

E.D. Tex.

G+ Communications, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et al, No. 2:22-cv-00078 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 13, 2025)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:22-cv-00078, Dkt. No. 689
Decided
March 13, 2025
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (Motion(s)665 terminated)
Length
5 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 Plaintiff G+ Communications, LLC’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law that Claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 10,594,443 is Not Patent-Ineligible Under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (the “Motion”). (Dkt. No. 665.) In the Motion, Plaintiff “ moves this Court pursuant to Rule 50(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for Judgment as a Matter of Law that Claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 10,594,443 (the ‘’443 Patent’) is not directed to patent -ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.” (Id.