NEGOTIATED DATA SOLUTIONS V. DELL , No. 12-1450 (Fed. Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. Wntteb ~tate~ ~ourt of §ppeaI~ for !be jfeberaI ~trmtt NEGOTIATED DATA SOLUTIONS, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, . v. DELL, INC, Defendant-Appellee. v. JONATHAN LEE RICHES, Movant-Appellant. 2012-1450 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in case no. 06-CV-0528, Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham. Before LOURIE, SCHALL and DYK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ORDER The court considers whether to dismiss Jonathan Lee Riches's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. On April 27, 2009, Riches filed a motion to intervene. On July 13, 2009, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas dismissed the underlying patent NEGOTIATED DATA SOLUTIONS v. DELL, INC. 2 case with prejudice: Riches' motion to intervene is deemed denied on the date the district court dismissed the case. See Addington v. Farmer's Elevator Mut. Ins. Co., 650 F.2d 663, 666 (5th Cir. 1981) cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1098, 102 S.Ct. 672, 70 L.Ed.2d 640 (1981) ("The denial of a motion by the district court, although not formally expressed, may be implied by the entry of final judgment (which is in effect an overruling of pending pretrial motions) or of an order inconsistent with the granting of the relief sought by the motion.). Riches' notice of appeal was received at the court on June 7, 2012, 1060 days after dismissal of the case. Any notice of appeal should have been filed within 30 days of the district court's dismissal order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(I)(A) ("[T]he notice of appeal required by Rule 3 must be filed with the district clerk within 30 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from."). Because this appeal was filed outside the statutory deadline for taking an appeal to this court, we must dismiss. Accordingly, IT Is ORDERED THAT: u.s.THE FEIlElAL CIRCUITFOR couJ~If&w.s (1) The appeal is dismissed. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs. FOR THE COURT AUG 032012 JAN HORBAlV ClERK AUG 0 3 2012 Date /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk ¢ Because the underlying complaint asserted patent infringement claims, this court would otherwise have jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(I); Christiansen v. Colt Industries Operating Corp, 486 U.S. 800 (1988). 3 NEGOTIATED DATA SOLUTIONS v. DELL, INC. cc: Jonathan Lee Riches Gregory Scott Bishop, Esq. Daniel T. Conrad, Esq. s26

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.