Legal Opinion
Alberts v. Kappos
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided January 18, 2013No. Civil Action No. 2010-1727PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JAMES E. BOASBERG, District Judge.
Plaintiff Audrey M. Alberts filed a patent application at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for the invention of a carpet-tile area rug, but the PTO rejected a number of her claims as obvious. After exhausting the PTO’s administrative-appeal process, Plaintiff brought this civil action under 35 U.S.C. § 145, seeking a judgment that she is entitled to a patent on the rejected claims. The parties have now cross-moved for summary judgment on the issue of patentability. Because there is no genuine dispute of material fact with the PTO’s prior…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Holcomb, Christine v. Powell, DonaldCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2006
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hyatt v. IancuCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- Dome Patent, L.P. v. ReaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. ReaDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2013
- Hyatt v. MatalDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2018