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

E.D. Tex.

Longhorn Automotive Group LLC v. Mitsubishi Motors Corporation, No. 2:24-cv-00685 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 19, 2025)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:24-cv-00685, Dkt. No. 41
Decided
December 19, 2025
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re ]34] Motion to Dismiss
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 the Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) filed by Defendant Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (“Defendant”). (Dkt. No. 34). In the Motion, Defendant moves to dismiss the first Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement (the “FAC”) (Dkt. No. 24) for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Dkt. No. 34 at 1). Having considered the Motion and its related briefing, and for the reasons set forth here in, the Court finds that it should be DENIED. I.