Court Opinion

ID: 9363700
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-17 15:00:35.130981+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:33.678923
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-1469   Document: 39     Page: 1    Filed: 01/17/2023

        NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                 ______________________

       RIGGS TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS, LLC,
                Plaintiff-Appellant

                            v.

                    VAGARO, INC.,
                   Defendant-Appellee
                 ______________________

                       2022-1469
                 ______________________

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the
 Northern District of California in No. 3:21-cv-07927-TSH,
 Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson.
                  ______________________

                Decided: January 17, 2023
                 ______________________

     WILLIAM PETERSON RAMEY, III, Ramey LLP, Houston,
 TX, for plaintiff-appellant.

    SAL LIM, Kramer Day Alberti Lim Tonkovich & Belloli
 LLP, Burlingame, CA, for defendant-appellee. Also repre-
 sented by MARC BELLOLI, HONG LIN.
                 ______________________

    Before TARANTO, CHEN, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.
Case: 22-1469     Document: 39     Page: 2    Filed: 01/17/2023

 2           RIGGS TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS, LLC     v. VAGARO, INC.

 CHEN, Circuit Judge.
     Riggs Technology Holdings, LLC appeals from a deci-
 sion by the United States District Court for the Northern
 District of California holding that all claims of U.S. Patent
 No. 7,299,067 (’067 patent) are directed to patent-ineligible
 subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. See Riggs Tech.
 Holdings, LLC v. Vagaro, Inc., No. 21-cv-07927-TSH, 2022
 WL 74179, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 7, 2022). Our decision to-
 day in a separate case, Riggs Technology Holdings, LLC v.
 Cengage Learning, Inc., No. 22-1468, affirmed a decision by
 the United States District Court for the District of Massa-
 chusetts that also held that all claims of the ’067 patent are
 directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C.
 § 101. Our decision in case No. 22-1468 has thus resolved
 the patent eligibility of the claims on appeal. See BTG Int’l
 Ltd. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC, 923 F.3d 1063, 1076–77 (Fed.
 Cir. 2019). We therefore dismiss this appeal as moot.
                        DISMISSED