Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca13-14-01110/USCOURTS-ca13-14-01110-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

March 9, 2015

ERRATA

______________________ 

Appeal No. 2014-1110

IN RE PAPST LICENSING DIGITAL CAMERA

PATENT LITIGATION

____________________________________________________ 

PAPST LICENSING GMBH & CO. KG,

v. 

FUJIFILM CORPORATION, FUJIFILM NORTH

AMERICA CORPORATION (formerly known as

Fujifilm USA, Inc.), HEWLETT-PACKARD

COMPANY, JVC COMPANY OF AMERICA, NIKON

CORPORATION, NIKON, INC., OLYMPUS CORP.,

OLYMPUS IMAGING AMERICA INC., PANASONIC

CORPORATION (formerly known as Matsushita 

Electric Industrial Co., LTD.), PANASONIC 

CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA, SAMSUNG

OPTO-ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., SAMSUNG

TECHWIN CO., VICTOR COMPANY OF JAPAN,

LTD.,

Decided: February 2, 2015

Precedential Opinion

_____________________ 

Case: 14-1110 Document: 138 Page: 1 Filed: 03/09/2015
2 PAPST LICENSING V. FUJIFILM CORPORATION

Please make the following change: 

On page nine, first paragraph, replace the sentence

Second, it is undisputed that if we reject all five of the 

challenged constructions, the summary-judgment orders 

must be vacated.2 

with the following sentence:

Second, it is appropriate, if we reject all five of the 

challenged constructions, to vacate the summaryjudgment orders and remand.2 

Footnote 2 remains unchanged.

Case: 14-1110 Document: 138 Page: 2 Filed: 03/09/2015