Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission

598 F.3d 1294 (Fed. Cir. 2010)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...

Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

598 F.3d 1294 (Fed. Cir. 2010)

Facts

Crocs, Inc. (plaintiff) was the assignee of the ‘789 design patent for breathable footwear pieces. The footwear was made of a foam base section and a foam strap connected with a pair of ties that kept the strap in position. The ‘789 patent claimed an ornamental footwear design as depicted in drawings of the shoes. Crocs pursued an action through the International Trade Commission (commission) (defendant), a quasi-judicial federal agency, against companies (the importers) that made foam shoes in Asia and imported them into the United States for sale. Crocs claimed that the competing shoes were nearly identical to the patented foam shoes and infringed the ‘789 patent. Crocs moved for a summary determination of its claim for infringement of the ‘789 patent. The importers moved for a summary determination of noninfringement of the ‘789 patent. An administrative-law judge (ALJ) conducting the trial phase for the commission granted the importers’ motion for a summary determination of noninfringement. The commission reviewed the ALJ’s decision and issued an order of vacatur and remand. The ALJ held an evidentiary hearing and concluded again that the importers did not infringe the ‘789 design patent. The ALJ focused on the minor differences in the importers’ foam-shoe designs, including the strap thickness, the lack of round holes in the upper portions of the shoes, the holes placed in a web-shape rather than a systemic pattern, and the tread patterns covering the entire soles. Crocs filed a petition for review of the ALJ’s decision. The commission affirmed the ALJ’s finding that the importers did not infringe the ‘789 design patent based on the minor design differences. Crocs appealed the commission’s final determination to the federal appeals court for review.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rader, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 618,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 35,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership