Fed. Cir.

Blair v. Kawasaki Rail CAR, Inc., No. 18-2098 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 8, 2019)

Rule 36 Affirmance

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.: No. 18-2098
Decided: August 8, 2019
Judge: Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document: Rule 36 Judgment
Length: 2 pages

Full Text Analysis Cite this Opinion

Download Opinion (PDF)

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit

SCOTT BLAIR,

Appellant

KAWASAKI RAIL CAR, INC.,

Appellee

2018-2098

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2017-00117.

JUDGMENT

DARIUSH KEYHANI, Keyhani LLC, Washington, DC, argued for appellant. SHEILA MORTAZAVI, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, New York, NY, argued for appellee. Also represented by ZAED M. BILLAH, MARK ALEXANDER CHAPMAN, ARMIN GHIAM.

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

2ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, NEWMAN and

CHEN, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

August 8, 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

Blair v. Kawasaki Rail CAR, Inc., No. 18-2098 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 8, 2019).

Record ID: CAFC-18-2098-20190808
Permalink: https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-18-2098-20190808

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