Parkervision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated, Qualcomm Atheros, Inc.

N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
PARKERVISION, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, QUALCOMM
ATHEROS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees
______________________
2022-1755
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Middle District of Florida in No. 6:14-cv-00687-PGB-LHP,
Judge Paul G. Byron.
______________________
SUA SPONTE
______________________
Before L OURIE, MAYER, and STARK, Circuit Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
On June 27, 2024, we entered an Order requesting sup-
plemental briefing on whether there is an appealable judg-
ment in this case. ECF No. 57. On July 8, 2024, the parties
filed a joint response, in which they contended there is a
final judgment, but if we find otherwise we should dismiss
Case: 22-1755 Document: 59 Page: 1 Filed: 07/16/2024

-- 1 of 2 --

PARKERVISION, INC. v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED 2
the appeal subject to reinstatement as outlined in the June
27 Order. ECF No. 58.
Having considered the parties’ joint response, we de-
termine that there is no final judgment. We are not per-
suaded that the district court’s grant of Qualcomm’s
motion for summary judgment of non-infringement also
“effectively” dismissed Qualcomm’s pending counterclaims
for invalidity. Because Qualcomm’s counterclaims for in-
validity remain unadjudicated, there is no final judgment
and we lack jurisdiction over ParkerVision’s appeal. See
Nystrom v. TREX Co., 339 F.3d 1347, 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2003)
(“If a case is not fully adjudicated as to all claims for all
parties . . . there is no ‘final decision’ under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1295(a)(1) and therefore no jurisdiction.”).
Accordingly,
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) This appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, sub-
ject to reinstatement under the same docket number with-
out the payment of an additional filing fee if, by no later
than August 15, 2024, ParkerVision appeals from the entry
of an appealable order.
(2) If the appeal is reinstated, it will be decided by the
present panel, based on the briefs already filed and the oral
argument heard on November 6, 2023.
(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.
(4) The mandate shall issue forthwith.
July 16, 2024
Date
F OR THE COURT
Case: 22-1755 Document: 59 Page: 2 Filed: 07/16/2024

-- 2 of 2 --