Case ID: f-appx_570/html/0941-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PROST, Chief Judge, MOORE and CHEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WIRELESS INK CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GOOGLE, INC., Youtube, LLC, and Facebook, Inc., Defendants-Appellees, and Youtube, Inc., and Myspace, Inc., Defendants. Wireless Ink Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Facebook, Inc. and Google, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
    Nos. 2013-1683, 2013-1684.
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    July 16, 2014.
    Jeremy S. Pitcock, The Pitcock Law Group, of New York, NY, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Of counsel on the brief was Papool S. Chaudhari, Chaudhari Law, PLLC, of Wylie, TX.
    John Christopher Rozendaal, Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, P.L.L.C., of Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellees. With him on the brief for Facebook, Inc., were Michael E. Joffre and Melanie L. Bostwick. Of counsel on the brief for Facebook, Inc., were Heidi L. Keefe, Mark R. Weinstein, and Elizabeth L. Stameshkin, Cooley LLP, of Palo Alto, CA. On the brief for Google, Inc. and YouTube, LLC, were Kevin X. McGann, Aaron Chase, and Adam Gahtan, White & Case LLP, of New York, NY.
   PROST, Chief Judge, MOORE and CHEN, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.