Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 22, 2023

Schei v. AT&T Inc.

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:21-cv-00718
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Motion to DismissCivil ProcedureIntellectual PropertyContract
In one sentence

In Schei v. AT&T Inc., Judge Failla granted dismissal of contract and patent claims but denied dismissal of the inventorship claim.

Who this affects

Network Apps, LLC, Kyle Schei, John Wantz, AT&T Mobility LLC, and AT&T Services, Inc.

What happened

In Schei v. AT&T Inc., Network Apps, LLC, Kyle Schei, and John Wantz sued AT&T Mobility LLC and AT&T Services, Inc. The defendants asked the court to dismiss the complaint.

The court’s public order says the defendants’ motion was granted as to the plaintiffs’ breach-of-contract and patent-infringement claims. It does not explain the court’s reasoning because that reasoning appears in an opinion filed under seal.

The court denied the motion as to the individual plaintiffs’ correction-of-inventorship claim. Judge Failla also directed the parties to propose redactions, submit a case-management plan, and required the defendants to answer; the Clerk was directed to terminate Network Apps, LLC as a plaintiff.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Schei v. AT&T Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-00718
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Mar. 22, 2023

Background

Network Apps, LLC, Kyle Schei, and John Wantz brought this action against AT&T Mobility LLC and AT&T Services, Inc. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint. The order identifies three types of claims: breach of contract, patent infringement, and correction of inventorship, which is a claim seeking to correct who is legally identified as an inventor.

Rulings

The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the plaintiffs’ breach-of-contract and patent-infringement claims. The court denied the motion as to the individual plaintiffs’ correction-of-inventorship claim. The order does not provide the reasoning for these rulings because it refers to a separate opinion filed under seal on March 22, 2023.

Other directives

The parties were directed to file a joint letter proposing redactions to the sealed opinion by April 21, 2023. The court stated that it would then file a redacted version on the public docket. The parties were also directed to submit a proposed case-management plan by that date, and the defendants were directed to answer the complaint. The Clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 130 and to terminate Network Apps, LLC as a plaintiff.

Disposition

This was a partial ruling on a motion to dismiss: granted as to the breach-of-contract and patent-infringement claims and denied as to the individual plaintiffs’ correction-of-inventorship claim.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.