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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

MAG Instrument, Inc. v. the Coleman Co., Inc., No. 10-1279 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2011)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 10-1279
Decided
February 10, 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

MAG INSTRUMENT, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

THE COLEMAN COMPANY, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee,

and

DOES 1-10,

Defendants.

2010-1279

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in No. 09-CV-1842, Judge Manuel L. Real.

JUDGMENT

ROBERT C. WEISS, Law Offices of Robert C. Weiss, of Manhattan Beach, California, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were, THEODORE S.

2MACEIKO, Jones Day, of Los Angeles, California and JERROLD B. REILLY, Mag Instrument, Inc., of Ontario, California.

JONATHAN ROTTER, Kaye Scholer, LLP, of Los Angeles, California, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were RICHARD G. GRECO, ATON ARBISSER and DANIEL P. DINAPOLI. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT February 10, 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

MAG Instrument, Inc. v. the Coleman Co., Inc., No. 10-1279 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2011).

Record ID
CAFC-10-1279-20110210
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-10-1279-20110210

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.