Finesse Wireless LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC

Filing 253

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for #241 Report and Recommendations,,. Signed by District Judge Rodney Gilstrap on 1/5/2023. (ch, )

Case 2:21-cv-00316-JRG-RSP Document 253 Filed 01/05/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 17159

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
FINESSE WIRELESS, LLC,

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Plaintiff,
v.
AT&T MOBILITY, LLC,
Defendant.

Case No. 2:21-cv-00316-JRG-RSP
(Lead Case)

ORDER
Before the Court are three motions for summary judgment filed by Defendant
AT&T Mobility, LLC and Intervenor Defendant Nokia of America Corporation (together,
“Defendants”): (1) Motion for Summary Judgment for Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent No.
9,548,775 (Dkt. No. 134); (2) Motion for Summary Judgment for Non-Infringement of U.S.
Patent No. 7,346,134 (Dkt. No. 135); and (3) Motion for Summary Judgment for Invalidity of
the ’775 Patent Asserted Claims (Dkt. No. 136).
On December 21, 2022, Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Report and Recommendation
(Dkt. No. 241) recommending denial of the Summary Judgment Motions. Defendants filed the
following

objections

to

the

Report

and

Recommendation: (1) objections to the

recommendation denying the Motion for Summary Judgment for Non-Infringement of U.S.
Patent No. 9,548,775 (Dkt. No. 248); (2) objections to the recommendation denying the Motion
for Summary Judgment for Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,346,134 (Dkt. No. 249); and
(3) objections to the recommendation denying the Motion for Summary Judgment for Invalidity
of the ’775 Patent Asserted Claims (Dkt. No. 252).

Case 2:21-cv-00316-JRG-RSP Document 253 Filed 01/05/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 17160

.

After conducting a de novo review of the briefing on each of the summary judgment

motions, the Report and Recommendation, and Defendants’ objections, the Court agrees with
the reasoning provided within the Report and Recommendation and concludes that the objections
fail to show that the Report and Recommendations were erroneous.
Consequently, the Court OVERRULES Defendants’ objections (Dkt. Nos. 248, 249, 252)
and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 241).
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 5th day of January, 2023.

____________________________________
RODNEY GILSTRAP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE