Representative U.S. Court Of Appeal Cases

CANON COMPUTER SYSTEM et al. v. NU-KOTE International. Represented Canon in Nu-Kote's appeal of the District Court's grant of Canon's motion for a preliminary injunction barring sale of Nu-Kote's ink cartridges for Canon printers (Fed. Cir. 1998).

BRUNING v. HIROSE. Represented Canon in an appeal by ATT of the decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office awarding priority to Canon on a claim to a method for making printed circuits (Fed. Cir. 1998).

GENTEX CORP. v. DONNELLY CORP. Represented Donnelly in Gentex appeal of the District Court's grant of summary judgment that Donnelly's solid electrochromic mirrors for automobiles did not infringe Gentex patents (Fed. Cir. 1995).

NRDC v. VARIAN ASSOCIATES. Represented NRDC in its appeal of the District Court judgement that the NRDC patent was invalid because the subject matter was in public use more than one year before filing in the U.S.P.T.O. (Fed. Cir. 1994).

DUPONT v. POLAROID GRAPHIC IMAGING, INC. Represent DuPont in Polaroid's appeal of the District Court's grant of a preliminary injunction enjoining Polaroid from selling its imaging film (Fed. Cir. 1994).

N.V.AKZO v. DUPONT. Repressented DuPont in Akzo's appeal of the District Court's judgement that Akzo's process for a aramid solvent was invalid (Fed. Cir. 1987).

N.V.AKZO v. THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION et al. Represented DuPont in Akzo's appeal of the ITC final exclusion order precluding Akzo's importation of its aramid fiber because it infringed a DuPont patent to the process of making Keviar fiber (Fed. Cir. 1986).

DELONG v. RAYMOND INTERNATIONAL. Represented Raymond in DeLong's appeal of the District Court's grant of summary judgment that the Delong patent was invalid as being on sale more than one year before filing in the US Patent Office (3rd Cir. 1979).

MARUSHIMA v. WATANABE et al. Represented Canon in its appeal of the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences concerning a claim relating to Canon's NP electrophotographic copier process (CCPA 1976).

IN RE TANAKA et al. Represented Canon in its appeal of the Board of Appeals decision that claims to a Canon device for removing toner particles from an electrophotographic drum were not patentable over the prior act (CCPA 1977).

NORWOOD v EHRENREICH et al. Represented Nikon and its importer of Nikon cameras in the appeal by Mr. Norwood of the District Court's final judgment that the Nikon photographic cameras did not infringe Mr. Norwood's patent, and that his patent was invalid over the prior act (9th Cir. 1975).