Patent Case Watch

Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Puritan-Bennett Corp. v. Penox Technologies, No. 04-1303 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 17, 2005)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 04-1303
Decided
February 17, 2005
Judge
Prost, J.
Document
Precedential Opinion
Length
1 page
Download Opinion (PDF)

NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition is not citable as precedent. It is a public record.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

04-1303, -1316

PURITAN-BENNETT CORP. and MALLINCKRODT INC.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.

PENOX TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and ESSEX INDUSTRIES, INC.,

Defendants-Cross Appellants. DECIDED: February 17, 2005

Before RADER, Circuit Judge, PLAGER, Senior Circuit Judge, and PROST, Circuit Judge.

PLAGER, Senior Circuit Judge.

The judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana is affirmed on the basis of the thorough opinion of the trial court. See Puritan-Bennett Corp. v. Penox Techs., Inc., No. IP 02-0762-C-M/S (S. D. Ind. Mar. 2, 2004).

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Puritan-Bennett Corp. v. Penox Technologies, No. 04-1303 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 17, 2005).

Record ID
CAFC-04-1303-20050217
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-04-1303-20050217

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.

Source: Federal Circuit opinions and orders · retrieved August 15, 2026 · Report an error