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.

Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. Johnson Health Tech Co. Ltd., No. 15-2027 (Fed. Cir. May 5, 2016)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 15-2027
Decided
May 5, 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 ICON HEALTH & FITNESS, INC.,

Appellant

v.

JOHNSON HEALTH TECH CO. LTD., JOHNSON

HEALTH TECH NORTH AMERICA, INC.,

Appellees

2015-2027

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2014-00184.

JUDGMENT

ROBERT PARRISH FREEMAN, JR., Maschoff Brennan Laycock Gilmore Israelsen & Wright PLLC, Salt Lake City, UT, argued for appellant. Also represented by LARRY LAYCOCK, MARK W. FORD.

JOHN C. SCHELLER, Michael Best & Friedrich, LLP, Madison, WI, argued for appellees. Also represented by ANDREW DUFRESNE; KEVIN MORAN, Waukesha, WI.

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

PER CURIAM (DYK, MOORE, and HUGHES, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT May 5, 2016 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Date Peter R. Marksteiner

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

Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. Johnson Health Tech Co. Ltd., No. 15-2027 (Fed. Cir. May 5, 2016).

Record ID
CAFC-15-2027-20160505
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-15-2027-20160505

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