NOTE: This orderis nonprecedential. 

# Wntttb**~tates** 

# ([ourtof§ppeaIs for tbe jf 

# eberaI ([treutt

TECHNOLOGYPATENTS LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant,



### v. T-MOBILE (UK) LTD., T-MOBILE AUSTRIA GMBH, T-MOBILE CZECH REPUBLIC A.S., T-MOBILE DEUTSCHLAND GMBH, T-MOBILE HUNGARY CO. LTD., T-MOBILE NETHERLANDS B.V., AND TMOBILE SLOVENSKO A.S., Defendants-Appellees,
AND ADVANCED INFO SERVICE PLC,ALSO KNOWN AS AlS, BELLMOBILITYINC., CSL NEWWORLD MOBILITYLIMITED, CHINA MOBILE PEOPLES TELEPHONE COMPANYLIMITED, NOW KNOWN AS CHINAMOBILE HONG KONG COMPANY LIMITED, KT FREETEL CO. LTD., NOW KNOWN AS KT CORPORATION, SINGAPORE TELECOM MOBILE PRIVATE LIMITED, SINGAPORE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,ALSO KNOWN AS SINGTEL, SINGTEL OPTUS PTYLIMITED,

STARHUB MOBILE PTE LTD., AND TELSTRA CORPORATIONLIMITED, Defendants-Appellees,
ANDTECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE 2 AMERICAMOVIL, SAR DE C.V., CLARO, SA, AMX ARGENTINA, S.A., AND RADIOMOVIL DIPSA, S.A. DE C.V., ALSO KNOWN AS TELCEL, Defendants-Appellees,
AND BELGACOMMOBILE S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS PROXIMUS, MOBILKOMAUSTRIAAG, SFR,ALSO KNOWN AS SOCIETE FRANCAISE DE RADIOTELEPHONE SA, SMARTONE MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED, TANGO SA, VODAFONE CZECH REPUBLIC A.S., VODAFONE D2 GMBH, ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE GERMANY, VODAFONE ESPANA S.A., VODAFONE ESSAR LTD., VODAFONE HUNGARY MOBILE

TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD., VODAFONE IRELAND LTD., VODAFONE LIBERTEL B.V., VODAFONE LIMITED, ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE UK, VODAFONE NETWORK PTY. LTD., VODAFONE NEWZEALAND, VODAFONE OMNITEL N.V., VODAFONE PORTUGAL, COMUNICACOES PESSOAIS, SA,VODAFONE TELEKOMUNIKASYONA.S., ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE TURKEY, AND VODAFONE-PANAFON HELLENIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY SA,ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE-PANAFON S.A., Defendants-Appellees,
AND TNL PCS S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS 01, Defendant-Appellee, AND BASE N.V.lS.A., E-PLUS MOBILFUNK GMBH & CO. KG, AND KPN B.V., Defendants-Appellees,
AND3 TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE BERMUDADIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS LTD_, Defendant-Appellee,
AND BOUYGUES TELECOM S.A., Defendant-Appellee,
AND CHUNGHWA TELECOM CO. LTD., FAR EASTONE TELCOMMUNICATIONS CO. LTD., AND TAIWAN MOBILE CO., LTD., Defendants-Appellees,

AND CLICKATELL (PTY) LTD., Defendant-Appellee,
AND FRANCE TELECOMESPANA S.A., ALSO·KNOWN AS ORANGE SPAIN, FRANCE TELECOM S.A., MOBISTAR N.V.• ORANGE AUSTRIA TELECOMMUNICATION GMBH, FORMERLY KNOWN AS ONE GMBH, ORANGE COMMUNICATIONS S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS ORANGE SWITZERLAND, ORANGE FRANCE S.A.,

ORANGE PLC,ALSO KNOWN AS ORANGE U.K..

ORANGE S.A., ORANGE SLOVENSKOA.S., AND VOX MOBILE S.A., Defendants-Appellees,
AND H3G S.P.A., ALSO KNOWN AS 3 ITALIA, HUTCHISON 3GAUSTRIA GMBH, HUTCHISON 3G UKLIMITED, AND HUTCHISON TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HONG KONG) LIMITED, Defendants-Appellees,TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBlLE

AND KDDI CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee,
AND PCCWMOBILE HKLIMITED, Defendant-Appellee,
AND YAHOO! INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND KABUSHIKI KAISHA NTT DOCOMO AND SOFTBANKMOBILE CORP., Defendants-Appellees, AND M3 WIRELESS LTD.,

Defendant-Appellee, AND NETCOMAS, NOW KNOWN AS TELIASONERA NORGE AS AND TELIA DANMARK AlS, Defendants-Appellees, 4

AND TMN-TELECOMUNICACOES MOVEIS NACIONAIS, S.A., Defendant-Appellee, AND 02 (GERMANY) GMBH & CO. OHG, 02 (UK) LIMITED, 02 COMMUNICATIONS (IRELAND) LTD., PEGASO PCS, S.A. DE C.V., TELEFONICA MOVILES ARGENTINA, S.A., TELEFONICA MOVILES ESPANA, S.A.U., TELEFONICAMOVILES MEXICO, S.A. DE C.V., TELEFONICA 02 CZECH5 TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE REPUBLIC,A.S., TELEFONICA 02 EUROPE PLC,

ALSO KNOWN AS 02 PLC, TELEFONICA, S.A.,

VIVO PARTICIPACOES, S.A., AND VIVO, S.A., Defendants-Appellees, AND PANNONGSM TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD., SONOFONAlS, SWISSCOM MOBILEA.G., TDC AlS, TDC SWITZERLANDAG, ALSO KNOWN AS SUNRISE, TELENOR MOBIL A.S., AND TOTAL ACCESS COMMUNICATION PLC,ALSO KNOWN ASDTAC, Defendants-Appellees, AND SONAECOM-SERVICOS DE COMUNICACOES, S.A., Defendant-Appellee, AND TELECOM ITALIA S.PA., TELECOM PERSONAL S.A., TIM CELULAR S.A., AND TIM PARTICIPACOES S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS TIM BRAZIL, Defendants-Appellees, AND TRUE MOVE COMPANY LIMITED, Defendant-Appellee, AND WIND HELLAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS S.A. AND WIND TELECOMUNICAZIONI SPA, Defendants-Appellees,
AND A

VEA ILETISIM HIZMETLERI A.S., Defendant-Appellee, ANDTECHNOLOGYPATENTS v. T-MOBILE T-MOBILE USA, INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND AT&T MOBILITY LLC, Defendant-Appellee, AND TELE-MOBILE COMPANY, ALSO KNOWN AS TELUS MOBILITY, Defendant-Appellee, AND ROGERSWIRELESS PARTNERSHIP, Defendant-Appellee, AND MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee, AND PALM, INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, DOING BUSINESSAS VERIZONWIRELESS, Defendant-Appellee, AND 6

HELlO, LLC AND SPRINTNEXTEL CORPORATION, Defendants-Appellees, AND LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND7 TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE MOTOROLA, INC., NOW KNOWN AS MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant-Appellee,
AND IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED, Defendant-Appellee,
AND DEUTSCHE TELEKOMAG, MOBILEONE LTD., ORANGE LIMITED, ORANGE NEDERLAND N.V.,

TURKCELL ILETISIMHIZMETLERIA.S., AND UPSIDEWIRELESS INC., ALSO KNOWN AS IPIPI, Defendants,
AND MOTOROLAMOBILITY, INC., Intervenor.

2011-1581

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland in case no. 07-CV-3012, Judge AlexanderWilliams, Jr.
TECHNOLOGYPATENTS LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee,



### v. T-MOBILE (UK) LTD., T-MOBILE AUSTRIA GMBH, T-MOBILE CZECH REPUBLIC A.S., T-MOBILE DEUTSCHLAND GMBH, T-MOBILE HUNGARY CO. LTD., T-MOBILE NETHERLANDS B.V., AND TMOBILE SLOVENSKO A.S., Defendants,TECHNOLOGYPATENTS v. T-MOBILE

AND ADVANCED INFO SERVICE PLC,ALSO KNOWN AS AIS, BELL MOBILITY INC., CSL NEWWORLD MOBILITYLIMITED, CHINA MOBILE PEOPLES TELEPHONE COMPANYLIMITED, NOW KNOWN8

AS CHINAMOBILE HONG KONG COMPANY LIMITED, KT FREETEL CO. LTD., NOW KNOWN AS KT CORPORATION, SINGAPORE TELECOM MOBILE PRIVATE LIMITED, SINGAPORE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED, ALSO KNOWN AS SINGTEL, SINGTEL OPTUS PTYLIMITED,

STARHUB MOBILE PTE LTD., AND TELSTRA CORPORATIONLIMITED, Defendants,
AND AMERICAMOVIL, S.A.B. DE C.V., CLARO, S.A., AMX ARGENTINA, S.A., AND RADIOMOVIL DIPSA, S.A. DE C.V., ALSO KNOWN AS TELCEL, Defendants,
AND BELGACOM MOBILE S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS PROXIMUS, MOBILKOMAUSTRIAAG, SFR, ALSO KNOWN AS SOCIETE FRANCAISE DE RADIOTELEPHONE S.A., SMARTONE MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED, TANGO S.A., VODAFONE CZECH REPUBLIC A.S., VODAFONE D2 GMBH, ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE GERMANY, VODAFONE ESPANA S.A., VODAFONE ESSAR LTD., VODAFONE HUNGARY MOBILE

TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD., VODAFONE IRELAND LTD., VODAFONE LIBERTEL B.V., VODAFONE LIMITED, ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE UK, VODAFONE NETWORK PTY. LTD., VODAFONE NEWZEALAND, VODAFONE OMNITEL N.V., VODAFONE PORTUGAL,9 TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE COMUNICACOES PESSOAIS, S.A., VODAFONE TELEKOMUNIKASYONA.S., ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE TURKEY, AND VODAFONE-PANAFON HELLENIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS VODAFONE-PANAFON S.A., Defendants,
AND TNL PCS S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS 01, Defendant,
AND BASE N.V.lS.A., E-PLUS MOBILFUNK GMBH & CO. KG, ANDKPN B.V., Defendants,

AND BERMUDA DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS LTD., Defendant,

AND BOUYGUES TELECOM S.A., Defendant,

AND CHUNGHWATELECOM CO. LTD., FAR EASTONE TELCOMMUNICATIONS CO. LTD., AND TAIWAN MOBILE CO., LTD., Defendants,

AND CLICKATELL (PTY) LTD., Defendant,
AND FRANCE TELECOM ESPANA S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS ORANGE SPAIN, FRANCE TELECOM S.A., MOBISTAR N.V., ORANGE AUSTRIATECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE 10 TELECOMMUNICATION GMBH, FORMERLY KNOWNAS ONE GMBH, ORANGE COMMUNICATIONS S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS ORANGE SWITZERLAND, ORANGE FRANCE S.A.,

ORANGE PLC,ALSO KNOWN AS ORANGE U.K., ORANGE S.A., ORANGE SLOVENSKOA.S., AND VOX MOBILE S.A., Defendants, AND H3G S.P.A.,ALSO KNOWN AS 3ITALIA, HUTCHISON 3G AUSTRIA GMBH, HUTCHISON 3G UKLIMITED, AND HUTCHISON TELECOMMUNICATIONS (HONG KONG) LIMITED, Defendants, AND KDDI CORPORATION, Defendant, AND PCCWMOBILE HKLIMITED, Defendant, AND YAHOO! INC., Defendant, AND KABUSHIKI KAISHA NTT DOCOMO AND SOFTBANKMOBILE CORP., Defendants, AND M3 WIRELESS LTD., Defendant,11 TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBlLE AND NETCOMAS, NOWKNOWNAS TELIASONERA NORGE AS AND TELIA DANMARK AlS, Defendants, AND TMN-TELECOMUNICACOES MOVEIS NACIONAIS, S.A., Defendant, AND 02 (GERMANY) GMBH & CO. OHG, 02 (UK) LIMITED, 02 COMMUNICATIONS (IRELAND) LTD., PEGASO PCS, S.A. DE C.V., TELEFONICA MOVILESARGENTINA, S.A., TELEFONICA MOVILES ESPANA, S.A.U., TELEFONICAMOVILES MEXICO, S.A. DE C.V., TELEFONICA 02 CZECH REPUBLIC,A.S., TELEFONICA 02 EURQPE PLC,

ALSO KNOWN AS 02 PLC, TELEFONICA, S.A.,

VIVO PARTICIPACOES, S.A., AND VIVO, S.A., Defendants, AND PANNON GSM TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD., SONOFONAlS, SWISSCOM MOBILEA.G., TDC AlS, TDC SWITZERLANDAG, ALSO KNOWN AS SUNRISE, TELENOR MOBILA.S., AND TOTAL ACCESS COMMUNICATION PLC,ALSO KNOWN ASDTAC, Defendants, AND SONAECOM-SERVICOS DE COMUNICACOES, S.A., Defendant, ANDTECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBlLE 12 TELECOM ITALIA S.PA., TELECOM PERSONAL S.A., TIM CELULAR S.A., AND TIM PARTICIPACOES S.A., ALSO KNOWN AS TIM BRAZIL, Defendants, AND TRUE MOVE COMPANYLIMITED, Defendant, AND WIND HELLAS TELECOMMUNICATIONS S.A. AND WIND TELECOMUNICAZIONI SPA, Defendants, AND A

VEA ILETISIM HIZMETLERI A.S., Defendant, AND T-MOBILE USA, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant, AND AT&T MOBILITYLLC, Defendant-Appellant, AND TELE-MOBILE COMPANY, ALSO KNOWN AS TELUS MOBILITY, Defendant, AND ROGERSWIRELESS PARTNERSHIP, Defendant, AND MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant,13 TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE AND PALM,INC., Defendant-Appellant, AND CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, DOING BUSINESS AS VERIZONWIRELESS,

Defendant-Appellant, AND HELlO, LLC AND SPRINTNEXTEL CORPORATION, Defendants-Appellants, AND LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC., Defendant-Appellant, AND MOTOROLA, INC., NOW KNOWN AS MOtOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant-Appellant, AND IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED, Defendant, AND DEUTSCHE TELEKOMAG, MOBILEONE LTD., ORANGE LIMITED, ORANGE NEDERLAND N.V.,

TURKCELL ILETISIMHIZMETLERIA.S., AND UPSIDEWIRELESS INC., ALSO KNOWN AS IPIPI, Defendants,
AND MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC., Intervenor.TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE 14 2011-1612, -1613

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland in case no. 07-CV-3012, Judge AlexanderWilliams, Jr.

ONMOTION

ORDER The Defendants-Cross Appellants move to voluntarily dismiss Cross-Appeal Nos. 2011-1612 and 2011-1613 and to conform the briefing schedule to the dismissal of the
cross appeals. Upon considerationthereof,
IT Is ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion to dismiss cross appeal nos. 2011-1612 and 2011-1613 is granted. 2011-1612 and 2011-1613 are dismissed. The revised official caption for 2011-1581 is reflected above. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs in 2011-1612 and 2011-1613. (3) The motion to conform the briefing schedule is granted to the extent that the appellees' principal briefs
are due on February 24, 2012 and the appellant's reply briefis due onMarch 30,2012.



## JAN 202012 Date FORTHE COURT

/s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk

FILED 

### u.s. COURTOF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERALCIRCUIT



### JAN 202012

JANHORBAlY CLERK15 TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE

cc: Bryant C. Boren, Jr., Esq. Doris Johnson Hines, Esq. Sharon A. Israel, Esq. Matthew J. Moore, Esq. Ian N. Feinberg, Esq. Roderick R. McKelvie, Esq. Louis M. Solomon, Esq. Kevin P. Anderson, Esq. BrianWm. Higgins, Esq. Stefani E. Shanberg, Esq. StuartJ. Sinder, Esq. James W. Dabney, Esq. StephenB. Kinnaird, Esq. BrianM. Koide, Esq. William H. Burgess, Esq. Deanne E. Maynard, Esq. Michael J. McKeon, Esq. Robert C. Bertin, Esq. George F. Pappas, Esq. Jonathan E. Retsky, Esq. Stephen S. Madsen, Esq. Kevin Walsh, Esq. Russell E. Levine, Esq. Michael M. Markman, Esq. Robert C. Nissen, Esq. Edward Han, Esq. Brian C. Riopelle, Esq. Ramsey M. AI-Salam, Esq. Abbe F. Fletman, Esq. David L. Leichtman, Esq. Andrew R. Sommer, Esq. JosephA. Rhoa, Esq. MaximilianA. Grant, Esq. Jay F. Utley, Esq. Adam Gahtan, Esq. Adam R. Alper, Esq. Scott R. Matthews, Esq.TECHNOLOGY PATENTS v. T-MOBILE

s21 StevenJayYoung, Esq. Victor Siber, Esq. 16

IssuedAs A Mandate (as to 2011-1612, -1613 only): 

### JAN 20 2012