Unpublished (nonprecedential) opinions

from "Litera Scripta Manet," Intellectual Property Today, August 2002:

The July 12 issue of PTCJ [Vol. 64, No. 1580] contained some discussion of unpublished or nonprecedential opinions. It quoted Kenneth J. Schmier about the issue of fostering indifference about injustices or error.

from IPT, May 2002:

There had been discussion that this panel decision had been limited by the later panel decision in YBM Magnex, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 145 F.3d 1317, 46 USPQ2d 1843 (CAFC 1998). See also, L. B. Ebert, "Chiuminatta: 35 USC § 112(6) and the Doctrine of Equivalents," IPT, pp. 32-33 (July 1998), especially the discussion of the unpublished opinion in Brunswick Corp. v. U.S., 46 USPQ2d 1447 (CAFC 1998). See also, L. B. Ebert, "More On Pfaff v. Wells Electronics: Knowing It When You See It," IPT, pp. 16-17 (Sept. 1998), especially endnote 5.

from IPT, Feb 2002:

There is a world of difference between the Kinzebaw issue and, say, the issues in Insituform, wherein the patentee never gave up more than one cup. Insituform Technologies v. Cat Contracting, 58 USPQ2d 1392 (CAFC 2001) [unpublished].

See “Insituform: Festo for the Festophile,” IPT, pp. 48-49 (May 2001) and separately “Does Festo Change Patent Prosecution?”, Id. pp. 44-45