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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Gojo Industries v. Buckeye International, No. 11-1550 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 9, 2012)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 11-1550
Decided
March 9, 2012
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

GOJO INDUSTRIES, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

BUCKEYE INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

2011-1550

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio in No. 09-CV-2612, Senior Judge David D. Dowd, Jr.

JUDGMENT

RAY L. WEBER, Renner, Kenner, Greive, Bobak, Taylor & Weber, of Akron, Ohio, argued for Plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was LAURA J. GENTILCORE.

JENNIFER E. HOEKEL, Armstrong Teasdale, LLP, of St. Louis, Missouri, argued for defendant-appellee. With her on the brief was RICHARD L. BROPHY.

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

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT March 9, 2012 /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

Gojo Industries v. Buckeye International, No. 11-1550 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 9, 2012).

Record ID
CAFC-11-1550-20120309
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-11-1550-20120309

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.