Linear Tech. Corp. v. Monolithic Power Sys., Inc.

Full title: LINEAR TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MONOLITHIC POWER…

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Date published: Aug 14, 2012

475 F. App'x 339 (Fed. Cir. 2012)

Opinion

2011-1637

08-14-2012

LINEAR TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MONOLITHIC POWER SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

JOEL M. FREED, McDermott Will & Emery, LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were NATALIA V. BLINKOVA and ROSE S. WHELAN. Of counsel on the brief was RONALD J. PABIS, Weil Gotshal Manges, LLP, of Washington, DC. DAN L. BAGATELL, Perkins Coie, LLP, of Phoenix, Arizona, argued for the defendant-appellee. Of counsel on the brief were DEAN G. DUNLAVEY, Latham & Watkins, LLP, of Costa Mesa, California, and MARK A. FLAGEL, Los Angeles, California.

PER CURIAM

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in No. 06-CV-0476, Chief Judge Gregory M. Sleet.

JUDGMENT

JOEL M. FREED, McDermott Will & Emery, LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were NATALIA V. BLINKOVA and ROSE S. WHELAN. Of counsel on the brief was RONALD J. PABIS, Weil Gotshal Manges, LLP, of Washington, DC.

DAN L. BAGATELL, Perkins Coie, LLP, of Phoenix, Arizona, argued for the defendant-appellee. Of counsel on the brief were DEAN G. DUNLAVEY, Latham & Watkins, LLP, of Costa Mesa, California, and MARK A. FLAGEL, Los Angeles, California. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (PROST, O’MALLEY, and Reyna, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

________________________

Jan Horbaly

Clerk