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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Briese Lichttechnik Vertriebs v. Langton, No. 14-1253 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 9, 2015)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 14-1253
Decided
January 9, 2015
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 BRIESE LICHTTECHNIK VERTRIEBS GMBH, AND

HANS-WERNER BRIESE,

Plaintiffs-Cross-Appellants,

v.

BRENT LANGTON, B2PRO, KEY LIGHTING, INC.,

SERGIO ORTIZ, AND EDWARD C. SCHEWE,

Defendants-Appellants.

2014-1253, -1265

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in No. 1:09-CV-09790-SC-MHD, Trial Judge Samuel Conti.

JUDGMENT

GARY SERBIN, Hogan Lovells US LLP, of New York, New York, argued for plaintiffs-cross-appellants. With him on the brief were ERIC J. LOBENFELD, NICOLE NUSSBAUM; and FREDERICK LIU of Washington, DC.

EDWARD C. SCHEWE, Schewe & Associates, of Manhattan Beach, California, argued for defendants-appellants.

2THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

TARANTO, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT January 9, 2015 /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

Briese Lichttechnik Vertriebs v. Langton, No. 14-1253 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 9, 2015).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-14-01253-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-14-01253-0

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.