AI Case Brief
Generate an AI-powered case brief with:
📋Key Facts
⚖️Legal Issues
📚Court Holding
💡Reasoning
🎯Significance
Estimated cost: $0.001 - $0.003 per brief
Full Opinion
Case: 20-2126 Document: 40 Page: 1 Filed: 06/10/2021
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
RAFFEL SYSTEMS, LLC,
Appellant
v.
MAN WAH HOLDINGS LIMITED,
Appellee
______________________
2020-2126
______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark
Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. PGR2019-
00029.
______________________
Decided: June 10, 2021
______________________
JOHN C. SCHELLER, Michael Best & Friedrich, LLP,
Madison, WI, for appellant. Also represented by MICHAEL
BESS, BRIANNA JANE SIEBKEN, CHICAGO, IL; DAVID A.
CASIMIR, TYLER SISK, Casimir Jones, S.C., Middleton, WI.
GARY HNATH, Mayer Brown LLP, Washington, DC, for
appellee. Also represented by CLARK BAKEWELL, MICHAEL
LOUIS LINDINGER, MINH NGUYEN-DANG, NICOLE A.
SAHARSKY; HAO TAN, SHEN WANG, Arch & Lake LLP, Chi-
cago, IL.
Case: 20-2126 Document: 40 Page: 2 Filed: 06/10/2021
2 RAFFEL SYSTEMS, LLC v. MAN WAH HOLDINGS LIMITED
______________________
Before REYNA, HUGHES, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Raffel Systems, LLC appeals the decision of the Patent
Trial and Appeal Board concluding that claim 1 of U.S. Pa-
tent No. D821,986 is unpatentable under the on-sale bar.
The Board found that an email sent by patent owner Raffel
offered for sale an embodiment of the claim in small quan-
tities on-demand over a year before the priority date of the
patent. We have considered the appellant’s arguments that
the Board’s on-sale determination was unsupported by sub-
stantial evidence and find them unpersuasive. We there-
fore affirm.
AFFIRMED