Seiko Epson Corp. v. Coretronic Corp.

Full title: SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellant, and…

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the federal Circuit

Date published: Oct 11, 2011

449 F. App'x 38 (Fed. Cir. 2011)

Opinion

2011-1120

10-11-2011

SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellant, and EPSON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, INC. and EPSON AMERICA, INC., Counterclaim Defendants, v. CORETRONIC CORPORATION, Defendant/Counterclaimant-Appellee, and OPTOMA TECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

EDWARD P. WALKER, Oliff & Berridge, PLC, of Alexandria, Virginia, argued for plaintiff/counterclaim defendant-appellant and counterclaim defendant appellees. With him on the brief were JAMES A. OLIFF, JOHN W. O'MEARA and WILLIAM J. UTERMOHLEN. STEVEN D. HEMMINGER, Alston and Bird, LLP, of Menlo Park, California, argued for defendant/counterclaimant-appellee and defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were YITAI HU and ELIZABETH H. RADER.

PER CURIAM

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in Case No. 06-CV-6946, Judge Marilyn Hall Patel.

JUDGMENT

EDWARD P. WALKER, Oliff & Berridge, PLC, of Alexandria, Virginia, argued for plaintiff/counterclaim defendant-appellant and counterclaim defendant appellees. With him on the brief were JAMES A. OLIFF, JOHN W. O'MEARA and WILLIAM J. UTERMOHLEN.

STEVEN D. HEMMINGER, Alston and Bird, LLP, of Menlo Park, California, argued for defendant/counterclaimant-appellee and defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were YITAI HU and ELIZABETH H. RADER.

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

PER CURIAM (LOURIE, BRYSON, and DYK, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

Jan Horbaly

Clerk