Patent Case Watch

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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Karl Storz Endoscopy-America v. Integrated Medical Systems, No. 15-1776 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 3, 2016)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 15-1776
Decided
February 3, 2016
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages
Download Opinion (PDF)

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit KARL STORZ ENDOSCOPY-AMERICA, INC.,

Appellant

v.

INTEGRATED MEDICAL SYSTEMS

INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Appellee

2015-1776

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 95/002,301.

JUDGMENT

MICHAEL JOSEPH KOSMA, Whitmyer IP Group LLC, Stamford, CT, argued for appellant. Also represented by WESLEY W. WHITMYER, JR., STEPHEN BALL.

DABNEY JEFFERSON CARR IV, Troutman Sanders LLP, Richmond, VA, argued for appellee. Also represented by DUSTIN B. WEEKS, PAUL E. MCGOWAN, Atlanta, GA. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

2ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (MOORE, O’MALLEY, and WALLACH, Cir-

cuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT February 3, 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

Karl Storz Endoscopy-America v. Integrated Medical Systems, No. 15-1776 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 3, 2016).

Record ID
CAFC-15-1776-20160203
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-15-1776-20160203

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