Legal Opinion
Rohm & Haas Company v. Crystal Chemical Company and Joe C. Eller
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided May 29, 1984No. Appeal 83-599PublishedCited by 83 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
RICH, Circuit Judge.
Crystal Chemical Company and Joe C. Eller (hereinafter Crystal), appellants, have filed:(1) Appellants’ Application for Attorney Fees and Expenses Incurred on Appeal Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285.(2) Appellants’ Motion for Costs on Appeal Pursuant to FRAP Rule 39 and for Reconsideration of Assessment of Costs.
We consider these two matters seriatim.
I. Attorney Fees
The application filed December 21, 1983, for attorney fees and expenses incurred on the appeal, decided by our opinion at 722 F.2d 1556, 220 USPQ 289 (Fed.Cir.1983), has been considered. Although appellee Rohm…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois FoundationSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Fleischmann Distilling Corp. v. Maier Brewing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Day v. WoodworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- Central Soya Company, Inc. v. Geo. A. Hormel & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Lam, Inc. v. Johns-Manville Corporation and Johns-Manville Sales CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by83 opinions
- Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon HealthSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- The Read Corporation and F.T. Read & Sons, Inc. v. Portec, Inc., D/B/A Portec/kolberg DivisionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
- Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Brooktree Corporation, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- State Industries, Inc. v. A.O. Smith CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.