Case ID: f-appx_612/html/0617-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

AKAMAI TECHNOLOGIES, INC., The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. LIMELIGHT NETWORKS, INC., Defendant-Cross-Appellant.
    Nos. 2009-1372, 2009-1380, 2009-1416, 2009-1417.
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    Aug. 13, 2015.
    Seth P. Waxman, Attorney, Thomas Saunders, Counsel, Thomas Gregory Sprankling, Attorney, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Donald Robert Dunner, Attorney, Elizabeth D. Ferrill, Attorney, Kara F. Stoll, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC, G. Mark Edgarton, Esq., Robert S. Frank, Jr., Carlos Perez-Albuerne, Esq., Choate, Hall & StewarT LLP, Mark Christopher Fleming, Eric Fletcher, Lauren B. Fletcher, Attorney, Brook Hopkins, Attorney, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Boston, MA, David H. Judson, Law Offices Of David H. Judson, Dallas, TX, Jennifer Swan, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Palo Alto, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
    Aaron M. Panner, Attorney, Michael E. Joffre, John Christopher Rozendaal, Attorney, Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, PLLC, Washington, DC, Alexander Fraser MacKinnon, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Dion D. Messer, Esq., Limelight Networks, Inc., Tempe, AZ, Young Jin Park, Attorney, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY, for Defendant-Cross-Appellant.
    Before PROST, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, LINN, DYK, MOORE, O’MALLEY, REYNA, WALLACH, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.
    
    
      
       Circuit Judges Taranto, Chen, and Stoll did' not participate.
    
   ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

A petition for rehearing en banc was filed by Plaintiffs-Appellants Akamai Technologies, Inc. and The Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by Limelight Networks, Inc.

The petition for rehearing was considered by the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc, response, and briefs of amici curiae were referred to the circuit judges who are authorized to request a poll of whether to rehear the appeal en banc. A poll was requested and taken, and the court has' decided that the appeal warrants en banc consideration.

Upon consideration thereof,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The petition for rehearing en banc filed by Akamai Technologies, Inc. and The Massachusetts Institute of Technology is granted.

(2) The court’s opinion of May IB, 2015, is vacated, the court’s en banc opinion is issued herewith, and the case is returned to the merits panel for further proceedings.