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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Kellogg v. Nike, Inc., No. 10-1173 (Fed. Cir. July 11, 2011)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 10-1173
Decided
July 11, 2011
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

GERALD A. KELLOGG,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

NIKE, INC. and NIKE USA, INC.,

Defendants-Cross Appellants.

2010-1173, -1174, -1195, -1196

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska in No. 07-CV-0070, Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon.

JUDGMENT

MARK J. PETERSON, Stinson Morrison Hecker, LLP, of Omaha, Nebraska, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was NORA M. KANE. Of counsel on the brief were G. THOMAS WILLIAMS and MARY C. BONNEMA, McGarry Bair PC, of Grand Rapids, Michigan.

B. TRENT WEBB, Shook, Hardy & Bacon, L.L.P, of Kansas City, Missouri, argued for defendants-cross appellants. With him on the brief were BART A. STARR, JONATHAN N. ZERGER and ANGEL D. MITCHELL.

2THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

REYNA, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT July 11, 2011 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date 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

Kellogg v. Nike, Inc., No. 10-1173 (Fed. Cir. July 11, 2011).

Record ID
CAFC-10-1173-20110711
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-10-1173-20110711

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.