Legal Opinion

Hyatt v. Matal

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided July 23, 2020No. Civil Action No. 2009-1872Published

1Opinion of the Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA GILBERT P. HYATT, Plaintiff, Case No. 1:05-cev-2310-RCL . Case No. 1:09-cv-1864-RCL ‘ Case No. 1:09-cv-1869-RCL Case No. 1:09-cv-1872-RCL ANDREI IANCU, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the Court are two motions for litigation expenses — plaintiff Gilbert P. Hyatt’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(b) (ECF No. 262)! and defendant Patent and Trademark Office’s* (PTO) motion for expenses under

35 U.S.C. § 145

(ECF No. 261) — as well as Mr. Hyatt’s motions to de-designate certain evidence as protected under a protective…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Crawford Fitting Co. v. J. T. Gibbons, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API