King Instrument Corporation v. Lucioano Perego and Tapematic, Defendants/cross-Appellants
This text of 72 F.3d 855 (King Instrument Corporation v. Lucioano Perego and Tapematic, Defendants/cross-Appellants) 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.
Opinions
ORDER
A combined petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc having been filed by the CROSS-APPELLANT, and a response thereto having been invited by the court and filed by the APPELLANT, and the petition for rehearing having been referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the suggestion for rehearing in banc and the response having been referred to the judges who are in regular active service and who are authorized to request a poll whether to rehear the appeal in banc, and a poll having been requested, taken, and failed,
UPON CONSIDERATION THEREOF, it is
ORDERED that the petition for rehearing be, and the same hereby is, DENIED, and it is further
ORDERED that the suggestion for rehearing in banc be, and the same hereby is, DECLINED.
A separate dissent was filed by Senior Circuit Judge NIES.
Chief Judge ARCHER would rehear the appeal in banc.
The mandate of the court will issue on December 12, 1995.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
72 F.3d 855, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 36135, 1995 WL 761821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-instrument-corporation-v-lucioano-perego-and-tapematic-cafc-1995.