Irwin Industrial Tool Co. v. Bibow Industries, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
DecidedSeptember 23, 2013
Docket13-1112
StatusUnpublished

This text of Irwin Industrial Tool Co. v. Bibow Industries, Inc. (Irwin Industrial Tool Co. v. Bibow Industries, 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.

Bluebook
Irwin Industrial Tool Co. v. Bibow Industries, Inc., (Fed. Cir. 2013).

Opinion

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

IRWIN INDUSTRIAL TOOL COMPANY (doing business as Lenox), Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

BIBOW INDUSTRIES, INC. AND CHRISTOPHER W. BIBOW, Defendants-Appellants. ______________________

2013-1112 ______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts in No. 11-CV-30023, Judge Douglas P. Woodlock. ______________________

JUDGMENT ______________________

RACHAEL A. HARRIS, Squire Sanders (US) LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellee. With her on the brief was JOHN A. BURLINGAME.

EDWARD P. DUTKIEWICZ, of Dade City, Florida, argued for defendants-appellants. ______________________

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (NEWMAN, PROST, and WALLACH, Circuit Judges). AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

September 23, 2013 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Irwin Industrial Tool Co. v. Bibow Industries, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/irwin-industrial-tool-co-v-bibow-industries-inc-cafc-2013.