Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ottah v. Fiat Chrysler, Toyota

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit

March 7, 2018

CHIKEZIE OTTAH, Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
FIAT CHRYSLER, TOYOTA, NISSAN MOTORS CO. LIMITED, HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, FORD MOTOR COMPANY, JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, GENERAL MOTORS LLC, KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC., Defendants-Appellees DAIMLER AG (MERCEDES BENZ), CITROËN/PEUGEOT MOTOR COMPANY ARNESS PARIS 6 CITY, MITSUBISHI MOTOR CORPORATION, BMW MOTOR CORPORATION, ROLLS ROYCE CORPORATION, MAZDA MOTOR, SUBURU MOTOR CORPORATION, Defendant

         Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in No. 1:15-cv-02465-LTS, Judge Laura Taylor Swain.

          Chikezie Ottah, Brooklyn, NY, pro se.

          Frank C. Cimino, Jr., Venable LLP, Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee Fiat Chrysler. Also represented by Megan S. Woodworth; Todd M. Nosher, New York, NY.

          Peter Thomas Ewald, Oliff PLC, Alexandria, VA, for defendant-appellee Toyota. Also represented by John W. O'Meara, James Oliff.

          Reginald J. Hill, Jenner & Block LLP, Chicago, IL, for defendant-appellee Nissan Motors Co. Limited. Also represented by Peter J. Brennan.

          Jun-Suk Park, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee Hyundai Motor America. Also represented by James Alexander Kaiser; Nicholas Lee, Los Angeles, CA.

          Jason R. Mudd, Erise IP, P.A., Overland Park, KS, for defendant-appellee Ford Motor Company. Also represented by Eric Allan Buresh.

          Matthew J. Moore, Lathan & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee Jaguar Land Rover North America. Also represented by Gabriel Bell; Clement J. Naples, New York, NY.

          Mark Michael Supko, Crowell & Moring, LLP, Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee General Motors LLC. Also represented by Scott Bittman, New York, NY.

          Daniel Grunfeld, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for defendant-appellee Kia Motors America, Inc. Also represented by Jason Evan Gettleman, Michael John Lyons, Jacob Joseph Orion Minne, Palo Alto, CA.

          Before Newman, Hughes, and Stoll, Circuit Judges.

          Newman, Circuit Judge.

         Chikezie Ottah (herein "Ottah") appeals the decision of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.[1] The district court granted summary judgment of non-infringement to several defendant automobile companies with respect to U.S. Patent No. 7, 152, 840 ("the '840 Patent"), and dismissed the complaint with prejudice as to several other automobile companies. We have reviewed, and now affirm, the district court's rulings.

         Background

         The '840 Patent is entitled "Book Holder, " and describes the invention as "a removable book holder assembly for use by a person in a protective or mobile structure such as a car seat, wheelchair, walker, or stroller." '840 Patent at col. 1, ll. 6-9. The book holder is described as "having an adjustable, releasable clipping means and a support arm configured for . . . adjustment of the book supporting surface of the book holder to hold a book in a readable position in front of the user." Id. at col. 1, ll. 9- 13.

         In the "Background of the Invention" the '840 Patent recites disadvantages associated with prior art book holders, such as "[t]he book holders in the prior art lack the ease of application to a mobile vehicle such as a wheelchair or stroller to allow the reader to have mobility to explore their environment in a stationary sitting or reclining position while reading a book supported on the mobile device." Id. at col. 1, ll. 48-53. The '840 Patent recites ten "object[s] of the present invention, " including "provid[ing] a book holder that can be easily and removably attached to and removed from a bar or portion of the mobile vehicle without tools." Id. at col. 1, ll. 64-67. Eight of the ten objects refer to the advantages of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.