From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Capella Photonics, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Feb 12, 2018
2016-2395 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 12, 2018)

Opinion

2016-2394 2016-2395 2017-1105 2017-1106 2017-1107 2017-1108

02-12-2018

CAPELLA PHOTONICS, INC., Appellant v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., CIENA CORPORATION, CORIANT OPERATIONS, INC., CORIANT (USA) INC., FUJITSU NETWORK COMMUNICATIONS, INC., LUMENTUM HOLDINGS, INC., LUMENTUM INC., LUMENTUM OPERATIONS, LLC, Appellees

ROBERT GREENE STERNE, Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox, PLLC, Washington, DC, argued for appellant. Also represented by TYLER DUTTON, JASON DANIEL EISENBERG, DEIRDRE M. WELLS. SARAH J. GUSKE, Baker Botts LLP, San Francisco, CA, argued for appellee Cisco Systems, Inc. Also represented by WAYNE O. STACY, Dallas, TX. NATHANIEL T. BROWAND, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, LLP, New York, NY, argued for appellee Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc. Also represented by CHRISTOPHER JAMES GASPAR; MARK C. SCARSI, Los Angeles, CA. JOEL SAYRES, Faegre Baker Daniels LLP, Denver, CO, argued for appellees Lumentum Holdings, Inc., Lumentum Inc., Lumentum Operations, LLC. Also represented by KENNETH LIEBMAN, Minneapolis, MN. MATTHEW J. MOORE, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC, for appellee Ciena Corporation. Also represented by CHI CHEUNG, CLEMENT J. NAPLES, New York, NY; ROBERT STEINBERG, Los Angeles, CA. JONATHAN PIETER VAN ES, Banner & Witcoff, Ltd., Chicago, IL, for appellees Coriant Operations, Inc., Coriant (USA) Inc. Also represented by THOMAS KENT PRATT; MICHAEL STEVEN CUVIELLO, Washington, DC.


NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2014-01166, IPR2014-01276, IPR2015-00726, IPR2015-00727, IPR2015-00731, IPR2015-00739, IPR2015-00816, IPR2015-00894, IPR2015-01958, IPR2015-01961, IPR2015-01969, IPR2015-01971.

JUDGMENT

ROBERT GREENE STERNE, Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox, PLLC, Washington, DC, argued for appellant. Also represented by TYLER DUTTON, JASON DANIEL EISENBERG, DEIRDRE M. WELLS. SARAH J. GUSKE, Baker Botts LLP, San Francisco, CA, argued for appellee Cisco Systems, Inc. Also represented by WAYNE O. STACY, Dallas, TX. NATHANIEL T. BROWAND, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, LLP, New York, NY, argued for appellee Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc. Also represented by CHRISTOPHER JAMES GASPAR; MARK C. SCARSI, Los Angeles, CA. JOEL SAYRES, Faegre Baker Daniels LLP, Denver, CO, argued for appellees Lumentum Holdings, Inc., Lumentum Inc., Lumentum Operations, LLC. Also represented by KENNETH LIEBMAN, Minneapolis, MN. MATTHEW J. MOORE, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC, for appellee Ciena Corporation. Also represented by CHI CHEUNG, CLEMENT J. NAPLES, New York, NY; ROBERT STEINBERG, Los Angeles, CA. JONATHAN PIETER VAN ES, Banner & Witcoff, Ltd., Chicago, IL, for appellees Coriant Operations, Inc., Coriant (USA) Inc. Also represented by THOMAS KENT PRATT; MICHAEL STEVEN CUVIELLO, Washington, DC. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (DYK, O'MALLEY, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT February 12, 2018

Date

/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court


Summaries of

Capella Photonics, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Feb 12, 2018
2016-2395 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 12, 2018)
Case details for

Capella Photonics, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CAPELLA PHOTONICS, INC., Appellant v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., CIENA…

Court:United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Date published: Feb 12, 2018

Citations

2016-2395 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 12, 2018)

Citing Cases

Capella Photonics, Inc. v. Infinera Corp.

In 2018, the PTAB's decision invalidating the Predecessor Patents was affirmed by the Federal Circuit.…

Capella Photonics, Inc. v. Fujitsu Network Commc'ns, Inc.

The IPR decisions were summarily affirmed by the Federal Circuit. Capella Photonics, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., 711…