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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Spitz Technologies Corporation v. Nobel Biocare USA, LLC, No. 18-1790 (Fed. Cir. July 15, 2019)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 18-1790
Decided
July 15, 2019
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 SPITZ TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

NOBEL BIOCARE USA, LLC,

Defendant-Appellee

2018-1790

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in No. 8:17-cv-00660-JVS-JCG, Judge James V. Selna.

JUDGMENT

KATHLEEN M. SULLIVAN, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by SANFORD IAN WEISBURST; FELIPE CORREDOR, San Francisco, CA. SHEILA N. SWAROOP, Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP, Irvine, CA, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by JOHN B. SGANGA, JR., BARAA KAHF.

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 15, 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

Spitz Technologies Corporation v. Nobel Biocare USA, LLC, No. 18-1790 (Fed. Cir. July 15, 2019).

Record ID
CAFC-18-1790-20190715
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-18-1790-20190715

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.