Patent Case Watch

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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Insituform Technologies v. AMerik Supplies, Inc., No. 12-1655 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 23, 2013)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 12-1655
Decided
September 23, 2013
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages
Download Opinion (PDF)

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

for the Federal Circuit INSITUFORM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

AND INA ACQUISITION CORP.,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v.

AMERIK SUPPLIES, INC. (formerly known as BJR

Trading U.S.A., Inc.) AND ERIK NIELSEN,

Defendants/Third Party Plaintiffs- Appellees,

v.

COSMIC-SONDERMASCHINENBAU GMBH,

Third Party Defendant-Appellant.

2012-1655, -1656

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in No. 08-CV-0333, Judge Timothy C. Batten, Sr.

JUDGMENT

DEAN L. FRANKLIN, Thompson Coburn LLP, of St. Louis, Missouri, argued for plaintiffs-appellees. With him

2on the brief were ALAN H. NORMAN, MICHAEL L. NEPPLE and MATTHEW A. BRAUNEL.

DANIEL A. KENT, Kent Law, P.C., of Alpharetta, Georgia, argued for third party defendant-appellant. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (NEWMAN, PROST, and WALLACH, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT September 23, 2013 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole

Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk

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

Insituform Technologies v. AMerik Supplies, Inc., No. 12-1655 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 23, 2013).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-12-01655-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-12-01655-0

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: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 25, 2026 · Report an error