1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 96 F.3d
  5. 96 F.3d 1372 (1996)
 

S. BRAVO SYSTEMS v. CONTAINMENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP.

Nos. 95-1277, 95-1331.

96 F.3d 1372 (1996)

S. BRAVO SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONTAINMENT TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. S. BRAVO SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CONTAINMENT TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

September 19, 1996.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Anton M. Rosandic, Benice & Associates, a Professional Corporation, Irvine, California, argued, for plaintiff-appellee.

Gregory B. Wood, Merchant, Gould, Smith, Edell, Welter & Schmidt, Los Angeles, California, argued, for defendant-appellant. With him on the brief was Victor G. Cooper.

Before ARCHER, Chief Judge, NIES, Senior Circuit Judge, and BRYSON, Circuit Judge.

BRYSON, Circuit Judge.

In these consolidated appeals, we address whether sanctions should be imposed against plaintiff S. Bravo Systems, Inc. (Bravo) under Rule 11, Fed.R.Civ.P., and Rule 38, Fed. R.App.P. The first case, appeal No. 95-1331, is the appeal of defendant Container Technologies Corporation (CTC) from the district court's order denying its motion for Rule 11 sanctions. We vacate the district court's order and remand for further consideration of CTC's motion...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases