In Re: William D. Hober, Inc.
This text of In Re: William D. Hober, Inc. (In Re: William D. Hober, 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 ______________________
IN RE: WILLIAM D. HOBER, INC., Appellant ______________________
2016-2181 ______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in No. 85643266. ______________________
JUDGMENT ______________________
THOMAS HENRY BOYD, Winthrop & Weinstine, PA, Minneapolis, MN, argued for appellant. Also represented by WESLEY DAVID ANDERSON, STEPHEN ROBERT BAIRD.
THOMAS L. CASAGRANDE, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for appellee Joseph Matal. Also represented by NATHAN K. KELLEY, CHRISTINA HIEBER, THOMAS W. KRAUSE. ______________________
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED: PER CURIAM (NEWMAN, O’MALLEY, and REYNA, Circuit Judges). AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.
ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT
August 21, 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: William D. Hober, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-william-d-hober-inc-cafc-2017.