10

Text Size:

-A A +A

RSS Feed

You are here

Opinions & Orders

The Court publishes opinions, precedential orders, all non-ministerial orders related to en banc cases, and orders disposing of mandamus petitions on the website after issuance has occurred on the official docket. Use the search boxes below to locate documents described above.
All dispositions are available in PACER.

Case Name or Appeal Number
Date Appeal Number Originsort descending Case Name Type
2016-12-09 16-1211 PATO VIRNETX INC. v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] Nonprecedential
2016-12-09 16-1480 PATO VIRNETX INC. v. APPLE, INC. [OPINION] Nonprecedential
2016-12-09 15-1934 PATO VIRNETX INC. v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] Nonprecedential
2016-12-09 15-1670 PATO IN RE: NUVASIVE, INC. [ERRATA] Precedential
2016-12-12 15-1960 PATO IN RE: JOBDIVA, INC. [OPINION] Precedential
2016-12-13 16-1703 PATO EMERALD CITIES COLLABORATIVE v. ROESE [OPINION] Nonprecedential
2016-12-13 16-1218 PATO IN RE: CELGARD, LLC [RULE 36 JUDGMENT] Nonprecedential
2016-12-13 16-1285 PATO IN RE: STARR [RULE 36 JUDGMENT] Nonprecedential
2016-12-20 16-1716 PATO LEAR CORPORATION v. NHK SEATING OF AMERICA, INC. [RULE 36 JUDGMENT] Nonprecedential
2016-12-20 16-1422 PATO WILDCAT LICENSING WI, LLC v. ADIENT PLC [RULE 36 JUDGMENT] Nonprecedential
2016-12-21 16-1665 PATO CTP INNOVATIONS, LLC v. EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY [RULE 36 JUDGMENT] Nonprecedential
2016-12-22 16-1592 PATO D'AGOSTINO v. MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL [OPINION] Precedential
2016-12-22 15-1418 PATO RUDOLPH TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. CAMTEK, LTD. [OPINION] Nonprecedential
2017-01-03 15-1975 PATO IN RE: VAN OS [OPINION] Precedential
2017-01-03 15-1696 PATO IN RE: ETHICON, INC. [OPINION] Precedential
2017-01-04 15-1944 PATO WI-FI ONE, LLC v. BROADCOM CORPORATION [ORDER GRANTING EN BANC] Precedential
2017-01-04 16-1094 PATO IN RE: DRIVEN INNOVATIONS, INC. [OPINION] Nonprecedential
2017-01-05 16-1703 PATO EMERALD CITIES COLLABORATIVE v. ROESE [ERRATA] Nonprecedential
2017-01-09 16-1487 PATO IN RE: CHUDIK [OPINION] Nonprecedential
2017-01-09 16-1544 PATO PHIGENIX, INC. v. IMMUNOGEN, INC. [OPINION] Precedential

Pages