Nfc Technology, LLC v. Matal
This text of Nfc Technology, LLC v. Matal (Nfc Technology, LLC v. Matal) 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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 ______________________
NFC TECHNOLOGY, LLC, Appellant
v.
JOSEPH MATAL, PERFORMING THE FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR, U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, Intervenor ______________________
2016-1809 ______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2014- 01199. ______________________
JUDGMENT ______________________
JON WRIGHT, Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox, PLLC, Washington, DC, argued for appellant. Also represented by ADAM LAROCK, BRIAN LEE; ROBERT AUCHTER, McKool Smith, P.C., Washington, DC. BENJAMIN T. HICKMAN, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for intervenor Joseph Matal. Also represented by NATHAN K. KELLEY, THOMAS W. KRAUSE, JOSEPH GERARD PICCOLO, SCOTT WEIDENFELLER. ______________________
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
PER CURIAM (NEWMAN, LOURIE, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges). AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.
ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT
September 20, 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
Nfc Technology, LLC v. Matal, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nfc-technology-llc-v-matal-cafc-2017.