 |
 |
Houston
JPMorgan Chase Tower
600 Travis St, Suite 7100
Houston, Texas 77002-2912
713.238.8000 Phone
713.238.8008 Fax |
Transactions and Cases
Trinity Industries, Inc. v. Road Systems, Inc., 121 F. Supp.2d 1028 (E.D. TX 2000) (Markman Ruling providing detailed interpretation of patent claims in favor of the Defendants represented by Mr. Rogers). The Court later granted a summary judgment of no infringement in favor of the Defendants based upon this Markman Ruling. Trinity Industries, Inc. v. Road Systems, Inc., 235 F. Supp.2d 542 (E.D. TX 2002).
Frank's Casing Crew & Rental Tools, Inc. v. PMR Technologies, Ltd., 292 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (affirming district court judgment in favor of declaratory judgment Plaintiffs represented by Mr. Rogers, in a patent infringement action through which these Plaintiffs obtained a judgment that the patent asserted against them was unenforceable due to inequitable conduct committed by the patentee in failing to name the true inventor that should have been named on the patent).
Hazmatpac, Inc. v. U.S. Can Co., No. 99-1479, 230 F.3d 1380 (Table), 2000 WL 178149 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 28, 2000) (nonprecedential) (dismissing the defendant's appeal of the district court's grant of a patent infringement preliminary injunction in favor of the Plaintiff represented by Mr. Rogers).
Datapoint Corp. v. PictureTel Corp., Nos. 98-1341, 98-1367, 98-1368, 215 F.3d 1344 (Table), 1999 WL 507141 (Fed. Cir. Jul. 15, 1999) (nonprecedential) (affirming district court judgment favor of the defendant in a patent infringement action).
Frassanito v. Datapoint Corp., No. 97-1022, 129 F.3d 133 (Table), 1997 WL 632793 (Fed. Cir. Sep. 16, 1997) (nonprecedential) (reversing the district court's grant of summary judgment, and remanding for proceedings to correct the inventorship of the patents at issue in favor of the Plaintiffs represented by Mr. Rogers).
Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. International Biophysics Corp., No. 96-1371, 106 F.3d 426 (Table), 1997 WL 12124 (Fed. Cir. Jan 15, 1997) (nonprecedential) (affirming the district court's denial of the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, and approving the district court's interpretation of patent claims in favor of the Defendant represented by Mr. Rogers). The district court later granted a summary judgment of no infringement in favor of the Defendant.
Carbide Blast Joints, Inc. v. Rickert Precision Industries, Inc., Nos. 95-1040, 95-1059, 73 F.3d 379 (Table), 1995 WL 710871 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 4, 1995) (nonprecedential) (reversing district court judgment in favor of the defendant in a patent infringement action).
< return
|
