Xr Communications, LLC, Dba Vivato Technologies v. D-Link Systems, Inc., Belkin International, Inc., Newo Corporation, Aruba Networks,…

N OTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
XR COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, DBA VIVATO
TECHNOLOGIES,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
D-LINK SYSTEMS, INC., BELKIN
INTERNATIONAL, INC., NEWO CORPORATION,
ARUBA NETWORKS, INC., NETGEAR, INC.,
RUCKUS WIRELESS, INC., UBIQUITI INC., AKA
UBIQUITINETWORKS, INC., ARUBA NETWORKS
LLC,
Defendants
ASUS COMPUTER INTERNATIONAL, ASUSTEK
COMPUTER, INC., CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,
EXTREME NETWORKS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees
______________________
2022-1785, 2022-1787, 2022-1789, 2022-1790, 2022-1791,
2022-1792
______________________
Appeals from the United States District Court for the
Central District of California in Nos. 2:17-cv-02948-AG-
JCG, 2:17-cv-02951-AG-JCG, 2:17-cv-02953-AG-JCG, 8:17-
cv-00596-DOC-JDE, Judge David O. Carter.
______________________
Case: 22-1785 Document: 47 Page: 1 Filed: 05/18/2023

-- 1 of 3 --

XR COMMUNICATIONS, LLC v. D- LINK SYSTEMS, INC. 2
Decided: May 18, 2023
______________________
MARC A. F ENSTER, Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles,
CA, for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by MINNA
CHAN, BRIAN D AVID L EDAHL , REZA MIRZAIE, J AMES
P ICKENS .
J ONATHAN K. WALDROP , Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP,
Redwood Shores, CA, for defendants-appellees ASUS Com-
puter International, Asustek Computer, Inc. Also repre-
sented by MARCUS BARBER , J OHN D OWNING.
SARAH E. P IEPMEIER , Perkins Coie LLP, San Francisco,
CA, for defendant-appellee Cisco Systems, Inc. Also repre-
sented by RYAN BRODIE HAWKINS , San Diego, CA.
D ANIEL W. RICHARDS , Ropes & Gray LLP, East Palo
Alto, CA, for defendant-appellee Extreme Networks, Inc.
Also represented by ANDREW N. T HOMASES .
______________________
Before P ROST , REYNA, and STARK, Circuit Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
XR Communications, LLC dba Vivato Technologies
(“Vivato”) appeals a judgment of the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California (“C.D. Cal. District
Court”) holding claims 1–9 and 12 of U.S. Patent
No. 6,611,231 invalid as indefinite. The C.D. Cal. District
Court based its judgment on the collateral-estoppel effect
of a judgment of the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California (“N.D. Cal. District Court”)—the lat-
ter of which is the subject of companion appeals Nos.
22-1125 and 22-1141 (as consolidated, the “companion ap-
peal”).
Case: 22-1785 Document: 47 Page: 2 Filed: 05/18/2023

-- 2 of 3 --

XR COMMUNICATIONS, LLC v. D- LINK SYSTEMS, INC. 3
Today we issued an opinion and judgment in the com-
panion appeal affirming the N.D. Cal. District Court’s judg-
ment. There is no dispute that our affirmance in the
companion appeal compels affirming in this appeal. Ac-
cordingly, having affirmed in the companion appeal, we
likewise affirm in this appeal.
AFFIRMED
Case: 22-1785 Document: 47 Page: 3 Filed: 05/18/2023

-- 3 of 3 --