 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Aspex Eyewear, Inc. v. Concepts in Optics, Inc., 2006-1245,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a patent infringement action involving eyeglasses, the appellate court was not precluded from adopting the claim construction by another panel with respect to the same limitation in other claims of the patent at issue. Under this claim construction, defendant's eyeglasses device infringed the patent at issue.
|
|||||
| Banks v. Nat'l Pers. Records Ctr., 2006-3293,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.S. § 7121(f), arbitrator did not act arbitrarily or capriciously or not in accordance with law in applying 5 U.S.C.S. § 7501 et seq., to find that employee's persistent error in releasing protected information to unauthorized persons adversely affected efficiency of National Personnel Records Center and justified her removal.
|
|||||
| First Niagara Ins. Brokers, Inc. v. First Niagara Fin. Group, Inc., 06-1202,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A Canadian insurance broker's opposition to registration of trademarks based on priority was improperly rejected based on the lack of use of the marks in commerce subject to regulation by the United States, since 15 U.S.C.S. § 1052(d) only required that the marks were previously used in the U.S. and did not require use in connection with commerce.
|
|||||
| First Niagara Ins. Brokers, Inc. v. First Niagara Fin. Group, Inc., 06-1202,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A Canadian insurance broker's oppositions to an American insurance broker's proposed trademark registrations was erroneously rejected because the Canadian broker's use of its marks in the United States satisfied the use requirements of 15 U.S.C.S. § 1052(d), which did not require that the use be in commerce regulable by Congress.
|
|||||
| Grasty v. United States PTO, 2006-1556,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because there was a final judgment on the merits in plaintiff's original suit, which involved the same parties (or their privies) based on the same cause of action as the instant suit, the district court properly dismissed plaintiff's second complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) as barred by res judicata.
|
|||||
| Kerr v. Dep't of the Army, 2006-3315,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Removal of a federal employee was proper since the evidence supported charges that the employee misused a government vehicle and credit card, claimed expenses not incurred, and was threatening and discourteous, and pertinent factors were properly considered in determining that removal was a proper penalty.
|
|||||
| Liebel-Flarsheim, Co. v. Medrad, Inc., 06-1421,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Decided , January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Louie v. Dep't of the Treasury, 2006-3320, 2006-3396,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because petitioner, a federal employee covered by a collective bargaining agreement that included a negotiated grievance procedure, already elected to pursue his personnel action claims regarding his demotion with an appeal to the MSPB under 5 U.S.C.S. § 7701, he was barred from bringing those claims again under 5 U.S.C.S. § 7121(g)(4).
|
|||||
| Roper v. Jo-Ann Stores, Inc., 2006-1575,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if it was assumed that defendant's floral foam could, in principle, support growing plants, it completely failed to meet any of the structural limitations of the claims of the patent at issue; thus, defendant's floral foam could not infringe, and dismissal of plaintiff patent infringement claims was proper.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
