Fed. Cir.

Neev v. Alcon Lensx, Inc., No. 15-1422 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 11, 2016)

Rule 36 Affirmance

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.: No. 15-1422
Decided: April 11, 2016
Judge: Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document: Rule 36 Judgment
Length: 2 pages

Full Text Analysis Cite this Opinion

Download Opinion (PDF)

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit

JOSEPH NEEV,

Petitioner-Appellant

ALCON LENSX, INC.,

Respondent-Appellee

2015-1422, 2015-1821

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in No. 8:14-cv-00660-GHKJEM, Judge George H. King.

JUDGMENT

DAVID ALAN MAKMAN, Law Offices of David A. Makman, San Mateo, CA, argued for petitioner-appellant.

BRIAN ROBERT MATSUI, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. Also represented by ERIC MARTIN ACKER, MARY PRENDERGAST, San Diego, CA. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

2ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (MOORE, BRYSON, and REYNA, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT April 11, 2016 /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

Neev v. Alcon Lensx, Inc., No. 15-1422 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 11, 2016).

Record ID: CAFC-15-1422-20160411
Permalink: https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-15-1422-20160411

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.

Source: Federal Circuit opinions and orders · retrieved August 15, 2026 · Report an error