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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Petter Investments v. Hydro Engineering, No. 16-2634 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 11, 2017)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 16-2634
Decided
September 11, 2017
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 PETTER INVESTMENTS, DBA RIVEER,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

HYDRO ENGINEERING,

Defendant-Appellee

CALIFORNIA CLEANING SYSTEMS,

Defendant 2016-2634

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Utah in No. 2:14-cv-00045-DB-DBP, Senior Judge Dee V. Benson.

JUDGMENT

STEPHEN M. LOBBIN, One LLP, Newport Beach, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. MARK A. MILLER, Holland & Hart LLP, Salt Lake City, UT, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by BRETT L. FOSTER.

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

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT September 11, 2017 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner 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

Petter Investments v. Hydro Engineering, No. 16-2634 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 11, 2017).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-16-02634-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-16-02634-0

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.