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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Tehrani v. Polar Electro, No. 08-1135 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 5, 2008)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 08-1135
Decided
December 5, 2008
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-1135

FLEUR T. TEHRANI, PH.D.,

Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

POLAR ELECTRO and POLAR ELECTRO OY,

Defendants-Appellees, and

PHYSI-CAL ENTERPRISES,

Defendant,

and

CAT EYE CO., LTD.,

Defendant-Appellee. William C. Rooklidge, Howrey LLP, of Irvine, California, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was Henry A. Petri, Jr., of Houston, Texas. John P. Moran, Holland & Knight LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellees Polar Electro, et al. With him on the brief was Tamara F. Carmichael, of New York, New York. Joseph M. Kuo, Olson & Cepuritis, Ltd., of Chicago, Illinois, argued for defendant-appellee Cat Eye Co., Ltd. With him on the brief were Seymour Rothstein and Matthew D. Kellam. Appealed from: United States District Court for the Central District of California Judge David O. Carter

2NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2008-1135

FLEUR T. TEHRANI, PH.D.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

POLAR ELECTRO and POLAR ELECTRO OY,

Defendants-Appellees, and PHYSI-CAL ENTERPRISES,

Defendant, and CAT EYE CO., LTD.,

Defendant-Appellee. Judgment ON APPEAL from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in CASE NO(S). 05-CV-1113 and 06-CV-20 This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: Per Curiam (NEWMAN, RADER and PROST, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT DATED December 5, 2008 /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

Tehrani v. Polar Electro, No. 08-1135 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 5, 2008).

Record ID
CAFC-08-1135-20081205
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-08-1135-20081205

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.