1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 183 F.3d
  5. 183 F.3d 1369 (1999)
 

HOCKERSON-HALBERSTADT, INC. v. CONVERSE INC.

No. 98-1501.

183 F.3d 1369 (1999)

HOCKERSON-HALBERSTADT, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONVERSE INC., Defendant-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Rehearing Denied August 12, 1999.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Richard E. Backus, Flehr Hohbach Test Albritton & Herbert LLP, of San Francisco, California, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was Lisa Marie Schull. Of counsel was James E. Uschold, of New Orleans, Louisiana.

Alan H. Norman, Howell & Haferkamp, L.C., of St. Louis, Missouri, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were John M. Howell and Anthony G. Simon.

Before RICH, RADER, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges.

RADER, Circuit Judge.

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana invalidated U.S. Patent No. 4,322,895 (the '895 patent) on the ground that Hockerson-Halberstadt, Inc. (HHI) impermissibly broadened its claims during reexamination. See Hockerson-Halberstadt, Inc. v. Nike, Inc., 4 F.Supp.2d 573 (E.D.La.1998). Because Converse has not shown that HHI's reexamined claims encompass subject matter...

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