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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Procter & Gamble Co. v. RNA Corp., No. 09-1226 (Fed. Cir. July 8, 2009)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 09-1226
Decided
July 8, 2009
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-1226

PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY,

Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

RNA CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Peter M. Lancaster, Dorsey & Whitney LLP, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was Heather D. Redmond. Appealed from: United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Judge Thomas M. Rose

2United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009-1226

PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

RNA CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Judgment ON APPEAL from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Ohio

in CASE NO(S). 1:08-CV-565. This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: Per Curiam (MAYER, PROST, and MOORE, Circuit Judges )

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT DATED July 8, 2009 /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

Procter & Gamble Co. v. RNA Corp., No. 09-1226 (Fed. Cir. July 8, 2009).

Record ID
CAFC-09-1226-20090708
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-09-1226-20090708

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.