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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Wilson v. Corning Incorporated, No. 24-1065 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2025)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 24-1065
Decided
February 10, 2025
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 JOHN R. WILSON, WILSON WOLF

MANUFACTURING CORP.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants

v.

CORNING INCORPORATED,

Defendant-Appellee

2024-1065

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota in No. 0:13-cv-00210-DWF-TNL, Judge Donovan W. Frank.

JUDGMENT

DEVAN V. PADMANABHAN, Padmanabhan & Dawson PLLC, Minneapolis, MN, argued for plaintiffs-appellants. Also represented by MICHELLE DAWSON, ERIN DUNGAN, BRITTA LOFTUS, MARIAH L. REYNOLDS, PAUL J. ROBBENNOLT, SRI SANKARAN.

LINDA T. COBERLY, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by EDWARD A. DAY, GEORGE C. LOMBARDI, MICHAEL A.

2MENEGHINI, IVAN MICHAEL POULLAOS; ROBINE K. MORRISON, Houston, TX. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

CUNNINGHAM, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

Figure on page 2 of the opinion

February 10, 2025

Date

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

Wilson v. Corning Incorporated, No. 24-1065 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2025).

Record ID
CAFC-24-1065-20250210
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-24-1065-20250210

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.