John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng

Second Circuit

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng

653 F. App'x 82

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng. Read the opinion of the Court — 605 F. App'x 48 →

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided August 4, 2016·No. No. 14-344-cv·Published

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

After our decision in John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng, 605 Fed.Appx. 48, 49 (2d Cir. 2015), affirming the district court’s denial of attorney’s fees to prevailing defendant Supap Kirtsaeng, Kirtsaeng petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. The Supreme Court granted the writ of certiorari, vacated the decision of this Court, and remanded the case. See Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 579 U.S.-, 136 S.Ct. 1979, 195 L.Ed.2d 368 (2016).

'We now VACATE the judgment of the district court and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court.

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

SUMMARY ORDER

After our decision in John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng, 605 Fed.Appx. 48, 49 (2d Cir. 2015), affirming the district court’s denial of attorney’s fees to prevailing defendant Supap Kirtsaeng, Kirtsaeng petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. The Supreme Court granted the writ of certiorari, vacated the decision of this Court, and remanded the case. See Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 579 U.S.-, 136 S.Ct. 1979, 195 L.Ed.2d 368 (2016).

'We now VACATE the judgment of the district court and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court.

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng, 653 F. App'x 82 (2d Cir. 2016).

Pincite

653 F. App'x 82 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related