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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Asetek Danmark v. CMI USA Inc., No. 16-1026 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 3, 2017)

Denied
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 16-1026
Decided
April 3, 2017
Judge
Per curiam
Document
Precedential Opinion
Length
2 pages

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

ASETEK DANMARK A/S,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CMI USA INC., FKA COOLER MASTER USA, INC.,

COOLER MASTER CO., LTD.,

Defendants-Appellants

2016-1026, 2016-1183

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 3:13-cv-00457-JST, Judge Jon S. Tigar.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

Before PROST, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, DYK, MOORE, O’MALLEY, REYNA, WALLACH, TARANTO, CHEN,

HUGHES, Circuit Judges.*

22 ASETEK DANMARK A/S v. CMI USA INC.

O R D E R

Appellants CMI USA Inc. and Cooler Master Co., Ltd. filed a combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. The petition for panel rehearing is addressed in a separate order also issued today. The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. The mandate of the court will issue on April 10, 2017. FOR THE COURT

April 3, 2017 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court

Footnotes

  1. * Circuit Judge Stoll did not participate.

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

Asetek Danmark v. CMI USA Inc., No. 16-1026 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 3, 2017).

Record ID
CAFC-16-1026-20170403-1
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-16-1026-20170403-1

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.