Phil-Insul Corp. v. Reward Wall Systems, Inc.

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ PHIL-INSUL CORP., doing business as IntegraSpec, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. REWARD WALL SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee, AND NUDURA CORPORATION AND POLYFORM A.G.P INC., Defendants-Cross-Appellants, AND BUILDBLOCK BUILDING SYSTEMS, LLC, Defendant-Appellee, AND AMVIC CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. ______________________ 2014-1078, -1098 ______________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska in No. 8:12-CV-00091, Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. ______________________ JUDGMENT ______________________ PAUL ADAMS, The Adams Law Firm, of Albuquerque, New Mexico, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Of counsel on the brief were MICHAEL T. COOKE and BRETT M. PINKUS, Friedman, Suder & Cooke, of Fort Worth, Texas. RACHEL C. HUGHEY, Merchant & Gould P.C., of Min- neapolis, Minnesota, argued for defendants-cross- appellants Nudura Corporation, et al. With her on the brief were CHRISTOPHER J. SORENSON, AARON M. JOHNSON, and KATHERINE E. MULLER. KORI ANNE BAGROWSKI, Brinks Gilson & Lione, of Chicago, Illinois, argued for defendant-appellee Amvic Corporation. With her on the brief was JAMES ROBERT SOBIERAJ. MICHAEL R. ANNIS, Husch Blackwell, LLP, of St. Lou- is, Missouri, for defendant-appellee Reward Wall Sys- tems, Inc. Of counsel was ANDREW RICHARD GILFOIL. On the brief for defendant-appellee Buildblock Building Systems, LLC, were DAVID M. SULLIVAN and HARVEY D. ELLIS, JR, Crowe & Dunlevy, P.C., of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Of counsel was TYNIA A. WATSON. ______________________ THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, DYK and TARANTO, Circuit Judges). AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT October 10, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court