In Re: Docter Optics, Se
This text of In Re: Docter Optics, Se (In Re: Docter Optics, Se) 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 ______________________
IN RE: DOCTER OPTICS, SE, Appellant ______________________
2017-1126 ______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 12/888,706. ______________________
JUDGMENT ______________________
DEBORAH POLLACK-MILGATE, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Indianapolis, IN, argued for appellant. Also repre- sented by LEAH LEWIS SIEGEL; RICHARD B. LAZARUS, Washington, DC.
NATHAN K. KELLEY, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for appellee Joseph Matal. Also represented by KAKOLI CAPRIHAN, MARY L. KELLY, THOMAS W. KRAUSE. ______________________
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED: PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, LOURIE and TARANTO, Circuit Judges). AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.
ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT
October 17, 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
In Re: Docter Optics, Se, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-docter-optics-se-cafc-2017.