Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-02-20559/USCOURTS-ca5-02-20559-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 

---

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 15, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 02-20559

_____________________

POROUS MEDIA LTD.,

Plaintiff - Counter Defendant - Appellant-Cross-Appellee,

versus

PERRY EQUIPMENT CORPORATION,

Defendant - Counter Claimant - Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

__________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas, Houston

USDC No. H-98-CV-3445

_________________________________________________________________

Before JOLLY, DUHÉ and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

For the following reasons we affirm the judgment of the

district court:

First, this Lanham Act case is an appeal from a jury verdict

that found against the plaintiff, Porous Media. Porous Media had

sought monetary damages, contending that the defendant, Perry

Equipment Corporation, made literally false statements about its

product. The issues presented in this case were classic issues for

a jury to decide and, in this case, the jury decided against the

 Case: 02-20559 Document: 0051287383 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/15/2004
2

plaintiff. The evidence is plainly sufficient to sustain the jury

verdict.

Second, we conclude that the court committed no reversible

error in its instructions or in the verdict form. Neither the

theory of the case nor the evidence presented required a "tendency

to deceive" instruction, nor is Porous Media entitled to an

instruction that would allow the jury to presume injury.

Third, we cannot say that the district court abused its

discretion in refusing to admit the rebuttal evidence in the form

of a videotaped test performed by Porous Media purporting to use

Perry Equipment’s own test conditions.

In sum, a jury has spoken and the record is free of any

reversible procedural or other errors. Consequently, the judgment

of the district court dismissing the complaint, as well as the

counterclaims in this case, is

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 02-20559 Document: 0051287383 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/15/2004