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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Personal Beasties Group LLC v. Nike, Inc., No. 19-1235 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2020)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 19-1235
Decided
February 10, 2020
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 PERSONAL BEASTIES GROUP LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

NIKE, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee

2019-1235

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in No. 1:18-cv-00516-JGK, Judge John G. Koeltl.

JUDGMENT

CRAIG UHRICH, Uhrich Law Firm, P.A., Oakley, KS, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also argued by ERIK JAMES DYKEMA, Upshaw PLLC, Essex Fells, NJ. STANLEY JOSEPH PANIKOWSKI, III, DLA Piper LLP (US), San Diego, CA, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by RICHARD T. MULLOY, EDWARD SIKORSKI. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

2ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

February 10, 2020 /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

Personal Beasties Group LLC v. Nike, Inc., No. 19-1235 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2020).

Record ID
CAFC-19-1235-20200210
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-19-1235-20200210

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.