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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Nextec applications v. Brookwood Companies, No. 12-1670 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 18, 2013)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 12-1670
Decided
November 18, 2013
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 NEXTEC APPLICATIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

BROOKWOOD COMPANIES, INC.,

Defendant-Cross-Appellant.

2012-1670, -1685

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in No. 07-CV-6901, Senior Judge Thomas P. Griesa.

JUDGMENT

NAGENDRA SETTY, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, LLP, of San Francisco, California, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were STEPHEN S. KORNICZKY, EDWARD V. ANDERSON, and MICHAEL MURPHY. Of counsel was DANIEL NICHOLAS YANNUZZI, of San Diego, California.

DARYL L. JOSEFFER, King & Spalding, LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-cross appellant. With him on the brief were KAREN F. GROHMAN; ADAM M.2 CONRAD, of Charlotte, North Carolina; ETHAN HORWITZ, of New York, New York; and MARY KATHERINE BATES, of Atlanta, Georgia. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (RADER, Chief Judge, MAYER, and CHEN,

Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT November 18, 2013 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole 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

Nextec applications v. Brookwood Companies, No. 12-1670 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 18, 2013).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-12-01670-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-12-01670-0

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.