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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

UCP International Company Ltd. v. Balsam Brands Inc., No. 18-1256 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 7, 2019)

Granted
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 18-1256
Decided
October 7, 2019
Judge
Per curiam
Document
Nonprecedential Opinion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit UCP INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED,

GLOBAL UNITED ENTERPRISES LIMITED,

Plaintiffs-Appellees

v.

BALSAM BRANDS INC., BALSAM

INTERNATIONAL UNLIMITED COMPANY,

Defendants-Appellants

2018-1256

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 3:16-cv-07255-WHO, Judge William H. Orrick, III.

SUA SPONTE

Before WALLACH, CLEVENGER, and TARANTO, Circuit

Judges.

O R D E R

Before the court is the parties’ October 3, 2019 joint response to this court’s order to show cause. The parties have2 2 UCP INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LTD. v. BALSAM BRANDS INC.

agreed that the September 19, 2019 sealed opinion may be unsealed without redactions.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The opinion issued under seal on September 19, 2019 is hereby unsealed in full. FOR THE COURT

October 7, 2019 /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

UCP International Company Ltd. v. Balsam Brands Inc., No. 18-1256 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 7, 2019).

Record ID
CAFC-18-1256-20191007
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-18-1256-20191007

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.