Today in U.S. Ethernet Innovations, LLC. v. Texas Instruments, Inc., __ Fed. App’x __ (Fed. Cir. 2016)(Linn, J.), the panel issued its opinion in a “short form” where the heart of the issues are fully explored but background information needed only by the parties is omitted:

“Because we write for the parties, familiarity with the background of this case is assumed and presented herein only to the extent necessary to provide context for the analysis that follows.”   U.S. Ethernet, __ Fed. App’x at __, slip op. at 2 n.1.

Judicial Efficiency:   Since the opinion is nonprecedential, it should be of no general interest to the legal community, and since the parties already know the background of their case, what’s the point in rehashing the background in such a nonprecedential opinion?  Hopefully, the policy considerations ofU.S. Ethernet will be adopted court-wide.

Regards,
Hal