Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca13-15-01012/USCOURTS-ca13-15-01012-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Seagate Technology
Appellee
Seagate Technology PLC
Appellee
Seagate Technology, Inc.
Appellee
Seagate Technology, LLC
Appellee
Alexander Shukh
Appellant
Unknown Owners and Assignees
Not party

Document Text:

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

ALEXANDER SHUKH,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY, LLC, SEAGATE 

TECHNOLOGY, INC., SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY,

Defendants-Appellees

UNKNOWN OWNERS AND ASSIGNEES,

Defendant

SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY PLC,

Defendant-Appellee

______________________ 

2015-1012

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

District of Minnesota in No. 0:10-cv-00404-JRT-JJK, 

Judge John R. Tunheim.

______________________ 

Decided: October 2, 2015 

______________________ 

CONSTANTINE JOHN GEKAS, Gekas Law Ltd., Chicago, 

IL, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

Case: 15-1012 Document: 45-2 Page: 1 Filed: 10/02/2015
2 SHUKH v. SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY, LLC

CHAD DROWN, Faegre Baker Daniels LLP, Minneapolis, MN, argued for defendants-appellees. Also represented by DAVID J.F. GROSS, CHARLES FEENEY KNAPP,

ELIZABETH COWAN WRIGHT, AARON D. VAN OORT; CALVIN 

L. LITSEY, East Palo Alto, CA. 

______________________ 

Before MOORE, WALLACH, and TARANTO, Circuit 

Judges.

PER CURIAM. 

In light of our holding in Shukh v. Seagate Technology, LLC, Case No. 14-1406, vacating and remanding in 

part the district court’s judgment on the merits against 

Alexander Shukh, we vacate and remand the district 

court’s costs judgment.

VACATED AND REMANDED 

COSTS

No costs.

Case: 15-1012 Document: 45-2 Page: 2 Filed: 10/02/2015