Hillcrest Laboratories, Inc. v. Movea, Inc.
This text of Hillcrest Laboratories, Inc. v. Movea, Inc. (Hillcrest Laboratories, Inc. v. Movea, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________
HILLCREST LABORATORIES, INC., Appellant
v.
MOVEA, INC., Appellee ______________________
2016-1738 ______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 95/002,036. ______________________
JUDGMENT ______________________
JAMES R. BARNEY, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC, argued for appellant. Also represented by RAJEEV GUPTA, KARTHIK KUMAR.
PIERRE YANNEY, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, New York, NY, argued for appellee. ______________________
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
PER CURIAM (REYNA, MAYER, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges). AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.
ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT
April 6, 2017 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hillcrest Laboratories, Inc. v. Movea, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hillcrest-laboratories-inc-v-movea-inc-cafc-2017.