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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

HJS Emissions Technology v. Basf Corporation, No. 16-2440 (Fed. Cir. July 19, 2017)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 16-2440
Decided
July 19, 2017
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 HJS EMISSIONS TECHNOLOGY GMBH & CO. KG,

JOHNSON MATTHEY PLC, DAIMLER AG,

Appellants

v.

BASF CORPORATION,

Appellee

2016-2440, 2016-2441

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. 95/002,217, 95/002,220.

JUDGMENT

JENNIFER LORAINE SWIZE, Jones Day, Washington, DC, argued for appellants. Also represented by DANIEL KAZHDAN.

MICHAEL HAWES, Baker Botts LLP, Houston, TX, argued for appellee. Also represented by SANDRA LEE, New York, NY.

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

Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT July 19, 2017 /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

HJS Emissions Technology v. Basf Corporation, No. 16-2440 (Fed. Cir. July 19, 2017).

Record ID
CAFC-16-2440-20170719
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-16-2440-20170719

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.