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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Inventio AG v. Thyssenkrupp Elevator Americas Corp., No. 10-1525 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 16, 2011)

Denied
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 10-1525
Decided
September 16, 2011
Judge
Per curiam
Document
Nonprecedential Opinion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

INVENTIO AG,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR AMERICAS

CORPORATION,

THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR CORPORATION, AND THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR MANUFACTURING

INCORPORATED,

Defendants-Appellees.

2010-1525

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in case no. 08-CV-0874, Judge Eduardo C. Robreno.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, O’MALLEY, and REYNA, Circuit

Judges.

2INVENTIO AG V. THYSSENKRUPP 2

O’MALLEY, Circuit Judge, dissents, without opinion, from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc. .

O R D E R

A petition for rehearing en banc was filed by Defendants-Appellees, and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by Plaintiff-Appellant. The petition for rehearing was referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc and the response were referred to the circuit judges who are authorized to request a poll of whether to rehear the appeal en banc. A poll was requested, taken, and failed.

Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The petition of Defendants-Appellees for panel rehearing is denied.

(2) The petition of Defendants-Appellees for rehearing en banc is denied.

(3) The mandate of the court will issue on September 23, 2011.

F OR THE COURT

September 16, 2011 /s/ Jan Horbaly

Date Jan Horbaly

Clerk

cc: Pierre R. Yanney, Esq.

David E. Schmit, Esq.

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

Inventio AG v. Thyssenkrupp Elevator Americas Corp., No. 10-1525 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 16, 2011).

Record ID
CAFC-10-1525-20110916
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-10-1525-20110916

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.