Opinion

Ctd Networks, LLC v. Google LLC

Court
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Filed
May 24, 2024
Status
Unpublished
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 16.3%

The opinion

Case: 23-2428 Document: 32 Page: 1 Filed: 05/24/2024

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

______________________

CTD NETWORKS, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

GOOGLE LLC,

Defendant-Appellee

______________________

2023-2428

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Western District of Texas in No. 6:22-cv-01042-XR, Judge

Xavier Rodriguez.

______________________

Before LOURIE, DYK, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.

DYK, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

This appeal arises out of the district court’s final judg-

ment dismissing CTD Networks, LLC’s infringement

claims against Google LLC. In December 2023, William P.

Ramey and Ramey LLP (collectively, “Ramey”) moved to

withdraw as counsel for CTD. On February 2, 2024, this

court ordered that Ramey’s motion would be granted if new

Case: 23-2428 Document: 32 Page: 2 Filed: 05/24/2024

2 CTD NETWORKS, LLC v. GOOGLE LLC

counsel filed an entry of appearance on behalf of CTD, ECF

No. 26. But no entry of appearance has been entered. 1

Having considered the motion and the status reports,

we dismiss. Ramey has informed the court that “CTD has

abandoned the appeal.” ECF No. 27 at 6. While Ramey

opposes dismissal to protect its own interests against po-

tential liability that could arise out of a sanctions motion

pending before the district court, we have been shown no

basis for allowing Ramey to appeal when it is not a party

and has not been sanctioned or otherwise the direct subject

of a court order. See Nisus Corp. v. Perma-Chink Sys., Inc.,

497 F.3d 1316, 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2007); United States v.

Carter, 995 F.3d 1214, 1218 (10th Cir. 2021) (noting that

“attorneys have standing to appeal only when . . . they are

specific objects of the challenged order” (cleaned up)).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The appeal is dismissed.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

FOR THE COURT

May 24, 2024

Date

1 Whitestone Law, which filed a notice of appearance

at the district court on behalf of CTD, has indicated it will

not enter an appearance in this appeal. ECF No. 29.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.