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.

Pactiv, LLC v. Multisorb Technologies, Inc., No. 14-1816 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 4, 2015)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 14-1816
Decided
November 4, 2015
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

PACTIV LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellee

PACTIV CORPORATION,

Counterclaim Defendant

v.

MULTISORB TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant

2014-1816

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Nos. 1:10-cv-00461, 1:10-cv-07609, Senior Judge Harry D. Leinenweber.

JUDGMENT

DANIEL SHULMAN, Reynolds Group Holdings Ltd., Lake Forest, IL, argued for plaintiff-appellee. Also represented by DAVID E. DE LORENZI, WENDY RISA STEIN, Gibbons P.C., Newark, NJ

2JENNIFER L. FRIEDMAN, McGee & Gelman, Buffalo, NY, argued for defendant-appellant. Also represented by LAURA A. COLCA.

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

PER CURIAM (MOORE, REYNA, and WALLACH, Circuit

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT November 4, 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

Pactiv, LLC v. Multisorb Technologies, Inc., No. 14-1816 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 4, 2015).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-14-01816-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-14-01816-0

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