Case ID: f-appx_219/html/0998-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PROST, Circuit Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

NIKE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MEITAC INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISE CO., LTD. and Man Lee Mo, Defendants-Appellants, and In Shoe, Inc., Defendant.
    No. 2007-1070.
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    March 19, 2007.
    Ronald Mark St. Marie, Chan Law Group PLC, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellants.
    Erik S. Maurer, Christopher J. Renk, Michael J. Harris Banner & Witcoff, Ltd., Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Before BRYSON, Circuit Judge, FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and PROST, Circuit Judge.
   ON MOTION

PROST, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

Nike, Inc. moves to dismiss this appeal because Meitac International Enterprise Co., Ltd. et al. (Meitac) has failed to file their opening brief. Meitac has not responded.

A party’s failure to comply with the court’s rules, including the requirements of preparing and filing briefs, can result in dismissal of an appeal for failure to prosecute. Julien v. Zeringue, 864 F.2d 1572, 1574 (Fed.Cir.1989).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted.

(2) All sides shall bear their own costs. FOR THE COURT