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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

In re Craig W. Barnett, No. 07-1047 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 11, 2007)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 07-1047
Decided
October 11, 2007
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Corrected: October 30, 2007 2007-1047, -1075, -1076

(Serial Nos. 09/754,378, 09/321,597, and 09/543,735)

IN RE CRAIG W. BARNETT, KAREN R. REISNER,

and MARK BRAUNSTEIN

Kevin T. Kramer, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for appellants. With him on the brief were James G. Gatto, Scott J. Pivnick, and Robert M. Fuhrer, of McLean, Virginia. Thomas L. Stoll, Associate Solicitor, Solicitor’s Office, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Arlington, Virginia, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were Stephen Walsh, Acting Solicitor, and Janet A. Gongola, Associate Solicitor. Appealed from: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

2United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2007-1047, -1075, -1076

(Serial Nos. 09/754,378, 09/321,597, and 09/543,735)

IN RE CRAIG W. BARNETT, KAREN R. REISNER,

and MARK BRAUNSTEIN

Judgment

ON APPEAL from the UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES in CASE NO(S). This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (SCHALL, BRYSON, AND MOORE, Circuit Judges.

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED: October 11, 2007 /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly, Clerk

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

In re Craig W. Barnett, No. 07-1047 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 11, 2007).

Record ID
CAFC-07-1047-20071011
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-07-1047-20071011

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.