Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 29-5 Filed 01/22/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 216
`Case 2:17-cv—00514-JRG Document 29-5 Filed 01/22/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 216
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 29-5 Filed 01/22/18 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 217
`UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
`
`2016-1332
`
`ADVANCED GROUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Plaintiff - Appellant
`
`v.
`
`LIFE360, INC.,
`Defendant - Appellee
`
`AP
`Apr 26, 2017
`
`MIAMI
`
`Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida in case no. 9:14-cv-80651-
`DMM, Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks
`
`MANDATE
`
`In accordance with the judgment of this Court, entered March 20, 2017, and pursuant to Rule 41(a) of
`the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, the formal mandate is hereby issued.
`
`Costs in the amount of $375.31 were determined and taxed against the appellant.
`
`
`
`FOR THE COURT
`
`/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
`Peter R. Marksteiner
`Clerk of Court
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 29-5 Filed 01/22/18 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 218
`UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
`
`NOTICE OF ENTRY OF
`JUDGMENT WITHOUT OPINION
`
`JUDGMENT ENTERED: 03/20/2017
`
`The judgment of the court in your case was entered today pursuant to Rule 36. This Court affirmed the judgment
`or decision that was appealed. None of the relief sought in the appeal was granted. No opinion accompanied the
`judgment. The mandate will be issued in due course.
`
`Information is also provided about petitions for rehearing and suggestions for rehearing en banc. The questions
`and answers are those frequently asked and answered by the Clerk's Office.
`
`Costs are taxed against the appellant in favor of the appellee under Rule 39. The party entitled to costs is
`provided a bill of costs form and an instruction sheet with this notice.
`
`The parties are encouraged to stipulate to the costs. A bill of costs will be presumed correct in the absence of a
`timely filed objection.
`
`Costs are payable to the party awarded costs. If costs are awarded to the government, they should be paid to
`the Treasurer of the United States. Where costs are awarded against the government, payment should be made to
`the person(s) designated under the governing statutes, the court's orders, and the parties' written settlement
`agreements. In cases between private parties, payment should be made to counsel for the party awarded costs or, if
`the party is not represented by counsel, to the party pro se. Payment of costs should not be sent to the court. Costs
`should be paid promptly.
`
`If the court also imposed monetary sanctions, they are payable to the opposing party unless the court's opinion
`provides otherwise. Sanctions should be paid in the same way as costs.
`
`Regarding exhibits and visual aids: Your attention is directed to FRAP 34(g) which states that the clerk may
`destroy or dispose of the exhibits if counsel does not reclaim them within a reasonable time after the clerk gives
`notice to remove them. (The clerk deems a reasonable time to be 15 days from the date the final mandate is issued.)
`
`FOR THE COURT
`
`/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
`Peter R. Marksteiner
`Clerk of Court
`
`cc: Kent E. Baldauf Jr.
`Daniel H. Brean
`Bryan P. Clark
`Christian D. Ehret
`Alfred Ross Fabricant
`Peter Lambrianakos
`
`16-1332 - Advanced Ground Information v. Life360, Inc.
`United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 9:14-cv-80651-DMM
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 29-5 Filed 01/22/18 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 219
`
`NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
`
`United States Court of Appeals
`for the Federal Circuit
`______________________
`
`ADVANCED GROUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS,
`INC.,
`Plaintiff-Appellant
`
`v.
`
`LIFE360, INC.,
`Defendant-Appellee
`______________________
`
`2016-1332
`______________________
`
`Appeal from the United States District Court for the
`Southern District of Florida in No. 9:14-cv-80651-DMM,
`Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks.
`______________________
`
`JUDGMENT
`______________________
`
`ALFRED ROSS FABRICANT, Brown Rudnick, LLP, New
`York, NY, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented
`by PETER LAMBRIANAKOS.
`
`DANIEL H. BREAN, The Webb Law Firm, Pittsburgh,
`PA, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by
`KENT E. BALDAUF, JR., BRYAN P. CLARK, CHRISTIAN D.
`EHRET.
`
`______________________
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 29-5 Filed 01/22/18 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 220
`
`
`
`
`
`
`THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is
`
`ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
`
`PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, WALLACH and
`
`STOLL, Circuit Judges).
`
`
`AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT
`
`
`
`
`
` March 20, 2017 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
`
` Date
`
`
`
`
`Peter R. Marksteiner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Clerk of Court
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 29-5 Filed 01/22/18 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 221
`
`UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
`Questions and Answers
`
`Petitions for Rehearing (Fed. Cir. R. 40)
`and
`Petitions for Hearing or Rehearing En Banc (Fed. Cir. R. 35)
`
`Q. When is a petition for rehearing appropriate?
`
`A. Petitions for panel rehearing are rarely successful
`because they most often fail to articulate sufficient grounds
`upon which to grant them. For example, a petition for panel
`rehearing should not be used to reargue issues already
`briefed and orally argued; if a party failed to persuade the
`court on an issue in the first instance, a petition for panel
`rehearing should not be used as an attempt to get a second
`“bite at the apple.” This is especially so when the court has
`entered a judgment of affirmance without opinion under
`Fed. Cir. R. 36. Such dispositions are entered if the court
`determines the judgment of the trial court is based on
`findings that are not clearly erroneous, the evidence
`supporting the jury verdict is sufficient, the record supports
`the trial court’s ruling, the decision of the administrative
`agency warrants affirmance under the appropriate standard
`of review, or the judgment or decision is without an error of
`law.
`
`Q. When is a petition for hearing or rehearing en banc
`appropriate?
`
`A. En banc decisions are extraordinary occurrences. To
`properly answer the question, one must first understand the
`responsibility of a three-judge merits panel of the court. The
`panel is charged with deciding individual appeals according
`to the law of the circuit as established in the court’s
`precedential opinions. While each merits panel is
`empowered to enter precedential opinions, the ultimate
`duty of the court en banc is to set forth the law of the
`Federal Circuit, which merit panels are obliged to follow.
`
`Thus, as a usual prerequisite, a merits panel of the court
`must have entered a precedential opinion in support of its
`judgment for a suggestion for rehearing en banc to be
`appropriate. In addition, the party seeking rehearing en
`banc must show that either the merits panel has failed to
`follow identifiable decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court or
`
`Federal Circuit precedential opinions or that the merits
`panel has followed circuit precedent, which the party seeks
`to have overruled by the court en banc.
`
`Q. How frequently are petitions for rehearing granted by
`merits panels or petitions for rehearing en banc accepted
`by the court?
`
`A. The data regarding petitions for rehearing since 1982
`shows that merits panels granted some relief in only three
`percent of the more than 1900 petitions filed. The relief
`granted usually involved only minor corrections of factual
`misstatements, rarely resulting in a change of outcome in
`the decision.
`
`En banc petitions were accepted less frequently, in only 16
`of more than 1100 requests. Historically, the court itself
`initiated en banc review in more than half (21 of 37) of the
`very few appeals decided en banc since 1982. This sua
`sponte, en banc review is a by-product of the court’s
`practice of circulating every precedential panel decision to
`all the judges of the Federal Circuit before it is published.
`No count is kept of sua sponte, en banc polls that fail to
`carry enough judges, but one of the reasons that virtually
`all of the more than 1100 petitions made by the parties
`since 1982 have been declined is that the court itself has
`already implicitly approved the precedential opinions before
`they are filed by the merits panel.
`
`Q. Is it necessary to have filed either of these petitions
`before filing a petition for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme
`Court?
`
`A. No. All that is needed is a final judgment of the Court of
`Appeals. As a matter of interest, very few petitions for
`certiorari from Federal Circuit decisions are granted. Since
`1982, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in only
`31 appeals heard in the Federal Circuit. Almost 1000
`petitions for certiorari have been filed in that period.
`
`October 20, 2016
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 29-5 Filed 01/22/18 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 222
`
`UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
`
`INFORMATION SHEET
`
`FILING A PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
`There is no automatic right of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States from judgments
`of the Federal Circuit. You must file a petition for a writ of certiorari which the Supreme Court
`will grant only when there are compelling reasons. (See Rule 10 of the Rules of the Supreme
`Court of the United States, hereinafter called Rules.)
`
`Time. The petition must be filed in the Supreme Court of the United States within 90 days of the
`entry of judgment in this Court or within 90 days of the denial of a timely petition for rehearing.
`The judgment is entered on the day the Federal Circuit issues a final decision in your case. [The
`time does not run from the issuance of the mandate, which has no effect on the right to petition.]
`(See Rule 13 of the Rules.)
`
`Fees. Either the $300 docketing fee or a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis with an
`affidavit in support thereof must accompany the petition. (See Rules 38 and 39.)
`
`Authorized Filer. The petition must be filed by a member of the bar of the Supreme Court of the
`United States or by the petitioner representing himself or herself.
`
`Format of a Petition. The Rules are very specific about the order of the required information
`and should be consulted before you start drafting your petition. (See Rule 14.) Rules 33 and 34
`should be consulted regarding type size and font, paper size, paper weight, margins, page limits,
`cover, etc.
`
`Number of Copies. Forty copies of a petition must be filed unless the petitioner is proceeding in
`forma pauperis, in which case an original and ten copies of the petition for writ of certiorari and
`of the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (See Rule 12.)
`
`Where to File. You must file your documents at the Supreme Court.
`
`Clerk
`Supreme Court of the United States
`1 First Street, NE
`Washington, DC 20543
`(202) 479-3000
`
`No documents are filed at the Federal Circuit and the Federal Circuit provides no information to
`the Supreme Court unless the Supreme Court asks for the information.
`
`Access to the Rules. The current rules can be found in Title 28 of the United States Code
`Annotated and other legal publications available in many public libraries.
`
`Revised December 16, 1999
`
`