1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 817 F.3d
  5. 817 F.3d 1293 (2016)
 

SHAW INDUSTRIES GROUP v. AUTOMATED CREEL SYSTEMS

Nos. 2015-1116, 2015-1119.

817 F.3d 1293 (2016)

SHAW INDUSTRIES GROUP, INC., Appellant v. AUTOMATED CREEL SYSTEMS, INC., Cross-Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 23, 2016.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Thad Charles Kodish , Fish & Richardson, P.C., Atlanta, GA, argued for appellant. Also represented by Erin Alper ; John A. Dragseth , Minneapolis, MN.

Scott D. Smiley , The Concept Law Group, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, FL, argued for cross-appellant. Also represented by Mark C. Johnson .

Monica Barnes Lateef , Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for intervenor Michelle K. Lee. Also represented by Nathan K. Kelley , Scott Weidenfeller , William Lamarca.

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge MOORE. Opinion concurring specially in the judgment filed by Circuit Judge REYNA.

Shaw Industries Group, Inc. appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office's ("PTO") Patent Trial and Appeal Board's ("Board") final written decision in consolidated inter partes reviews ("IPR") of claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 7,806,360. Shaw also petitions for writ of mandamus. Automated Creel Systems ("ACS"...

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