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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

In re Aoki, No. 13-1538 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 21, 2014)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 13-1538
Decided
April 21, 2014
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

IN RE KEI ROGER AOKI, MICHAEL W.

GRAYSTON, STEVEN R. CARLSON, AND

JUDITH M. LEON

2013-1538

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Serial No. 10/461,829.

JUDGMENT

JONATHAN E. SINGER, Fish & Richardson P.C., of Minneapolis, Minnesota, argued for appellants. With him on the brief was CRAIG E. COUNTRYMAN, of San Diego, California. Of counsel was JAMES P. FINN, III, of Minneapolis, Minnesota.

FRANCES M. LYNCH, Associate Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Alexandria, Virginia, argued for appellee. With her on the brief were NATHAN K. KELLEY, Solicitor, THOMAS W. KRAUSE, Special Counsel for IP Litigation, and COKE MORGAN STEWART, Associate Solicitor.

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

April 21, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court

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

In re Aoki, No. 13-1538 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 21, 2014).

Record ID
CAFC-13-1538-20140421
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-13-1538-20140421

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.