Nike, Inc. v. Adidas AG
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
812 F.3d 1326 (2016)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
Adidas AG petitioned for inter partes review—a United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) reexamination proceeding—to determine the validity a patent held by Nike, Inc. Adidas argued that all 46 claims of the patent were invalid on the ground of obviousness. Nike moved to cancel the claims and substitute four new claims. Nike’s motion stated that the proposed claims were patentable in light of the prior art known to Nike, but Nike did not specify those prior-art references. The PTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the board) granted the motion to cancel but denied the motion regarding substitute claims, holding that Nike had failed to discuss prior-art references that were known to Nike but not part of the proceedings. Nike appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Chen, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
