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.

Aviva Sports, Inc. v. Fingerhut Direct Marketing, No. 15-1619 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2016)

Affirmed
Rule 36 Affirmance
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 15-1619
Decided
February 10, 2016
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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

AVIVA SPORTS, INC., A MINNESOTA

CORPORATION,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FINGERHUT DIRECT MARKETING, INC., A

DELAWARE CORPORATION, MENARD, INC., A

WISCONSIN CORPORATION, KMART

CORPORATION, A MICHIGAN CORPORATION,

MANLEY TOYS, LTD., DBA MANLEY TOYS, DBA

TOYQUEST, A HONG KONG, CHINA

CORPORATION,

Defendants

STEPHEN M. LOBBIN,

Sanctioned Party-Appellant

2015-1619

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota in No. 0:09-cv-01091-JNE-JSM, Judge Joan N. Ericksen.

JUDGMENT

2JOHN THOMAS VITT, Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Minneapolis, MN, argued for plaintiff-appellee. Also represented by DAVID YOUNGERT TREVOR.

STEPHEN M. LOBBIN, Newport Beach, CA, argued pro se.

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

PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, NEWMAN and

LOURIE, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

February 10, 2016 /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

Aviva Sports, Inc. v. Fingerhut Direct Marketing, No. 15-1619 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2016).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-15-01619-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-15-01619-0

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