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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Braintree Laboratories, Inc. v. Novel Laboratories, Inc., No. 13-1438 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 22, 2014)

Errata Correction sheet to a previously issued opinion
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 13-1438
Decided
April 22, 2014
Judge
Document
Errata
Length
1 page

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

May 5, 2014

ERRATA

Appeal No. 2013-1438

BRAINTREE LABORATORIES, INC.,

v.

NOVEL LABORATORIES, INC.

Decided: April 22, 2014

Precedential Opinion

Please make the following change in the majority opinion: Page 8, line 5, after “extension request does” insert --not--. Please make the following change in Judge Moore’s dissenting opinion: Page 1, first paragraph, lines 8-9, after “accused composition has” insert --not--.

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

Braintree Laboratories, Inc. v. Novel Laboratories, Inc., No. 13-1438 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 22, 2014).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-13-01438-1
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-13-01438-1

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.