ROBERT WILLIAMS A/K/A ROBERT D. WILLIAMS v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, M & T BANK A/K/A MANUFACTURERS AND TRADERS TRUST COMPANY, ANGEL WILLIAMS A/K/A ANGEL R. WILLIAMS, BETTE COVELL, MICHELLE PRAYLOR, AND HAROLD PRAYLOR

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that “[w]here the record adequately supports the judgment, the district court does not have an obligation to recite every detail of its reasoning”
• finding that “[wjhere the record adequately supports the judgment, the district court does not have an obligation to recite every detail of its reasoning”
• finding that claim is not patent eligible “simply because it is computer-implemented or invokes the use of the Internet”
• finding no error for failing to explicitly mention secondary considerations because “the record established] that the evidence was properly before and considered by the [district] court”
• finding no error for failing to explicitly mention second- ary considerations because “the record establishe[d] that the evidence was properly before and considered by the [district] court”
• finding no error in a district court’s failing to explicitly mention secondary considerations “when the record establishes that the evi- dence was properly before and considered by the court”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).