1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 738 F.3d
  5. 738 F.3d 1302 (2013)
 

KILOPASS TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. SIDENSE CORP.

No. 2013-1193.

738 F.3d 1302 (2013)

KILOPASS TECHNOLOGY, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SIDENSE CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Decided: December 26, 2013.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Daralyn J. Durie , Durie Tangri, LLP, of San Francisco, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellee. With her on the brief was Eugene Novikov .

Roger L. Cook , Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, of San Francisco, CA, argued for defendant-appellant. With him on the brief were Robert D. Tadlock and Sara B. Giardina . Of counsel on the brief was Joshua H. Lee , of Atlanta, GA.

Concurring opinion filed by Chief Judge RADER.

O'MALLEY, Circuit Judge.

This appeal arises from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Sidense Corporation ("Sidense"), holding that it did not infringe Kilopass Technology, Inc.'s ("Kilopass's") U.S. Patents 6,940,751 ("the '751 patent"), 6,777,757, and 6,856,540. Kilopass Tech., Inc. v. Sidense Corp., No. 10-2066, 2012 WL 3545286 (N.D.Cal. Aug. 16, 2012). We summarily...

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