1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 815 F.3d
  5. 815 F.3d 1356 (2016)
 

HARMONIC INC. v. AVID TECHNOLOGY, INC.

No. 2015-1072.

815 F.3d 1356 (2016)

HARMONIC INC., Appellant v. AVID TECHNOLOGY, INC., Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 1, 2016.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Boris Feldman , Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati, PC, Palo Alto, CA, argued for appellant. Also represented by James C. Yoon ; Michael T. Rosato , Seattle, WA; Robin L. Brewer , San Francisco, CA; Gideon A. Schor, New York, NY; Richard Torczon , Washington, DC.

Gregory A. Castanias , Jones Day, Washington, DC, argued for appellee. Also represented by David B. Cochran , Joseph M. Sauer , Cleveland, OH; Matthew Johnson , Pittsburgh, PA.

Scott Weidenfeller , Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for intervenor Michelle K. Lee. Also represented by Nathan K. Kelley , Stacy Beth Margolies .

Before CHEN, MAYER, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.

Harmonic Inc. filed an inter partes review ("IPR") petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("Board") to review the patentability of Avid Technology, Inc.'s ("Avid") U.S. Patent No. 5,495,291 ("the `291 patent"). The Board instituted an IPR proceeding on a subset of the grounds in the petition and ultimately determined...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases