Case Name: KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. and Kimberly-Clark Global Sales, LLC, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. FIRST QUALITY BABY PRODUCTS, LLC and First Quality Retail Services, LLC, Defendants-Appellants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-09-29
Citations: 660 F.3d 1293
Docket Number: No. 2010-1382
Parties: KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. and Kimberly-Clark Global Sales, LLC, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. FIRST QUALITY BABY PRODUCTS, LLC and First Quality Retail Services, LLC, Defendants-Appellants.
Judges: Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, O’MALLEY, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 660
Pages: 1293–1301

Head Matter:
KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. and Kimberly-Clark Global Sales, LLC, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. FIRST QUALITY BABY PRODUCTS, LLC and First Quality Retail Services, LLC, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 2010-1382.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Sept. 29, 2011.
Constantine L. Trela, Jr., Sidley Austin LLP, of Chicago, IL, filed a combined petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc for plaintiffs-appellees. With him on the petition were Bradley C. Wright, Banner & Witcoff, Ltd., of Washington, DC; Marc S. Cooperman, J. Pieter Van Es, Matthew P. Becker, Aimee B. Kolz, Michael L. Krashin, and Katie L. Becker, of Chicago, IL. Of counsel was Christopher B. Roth, Banner & Witcoff, Ltd., of Washington, DC.
Kenneth P. George, Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP, of New York, NY, filed a response for defendants-appellants. With him on the response were Ira E. Silfin, Michael V. Solomita, Charles R. Macedo, and Brian Comack.
Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, O’MALLEY, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, with whom O'MALLEY and REYNA, Circuit Judges, join, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
O'MALLEY, Circuit Judge, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
ON PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
PER CURIAM.
ORDER
A combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc was filed by Plaintiffs-Appellees, and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by Defendants-Appellants. The petition for rehearing was referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc and the response were referred to the circuit judges who are authorized to request a poll of whether to rehear the appeal en banc. A poll was requested, taken, and failed.
Upon consideration thereof,
It Is Ordered That:
(1) The petition of Plaintiffs-Appellees for panel rehearing is denied.
(2) The petition of Plaintiffs-Appellees for rehearing en banc is denied.
(3) The mandate of the court will issue on October 6, 2011.
Judge Friedman, who was a member of the panel, died July 6, 2011 and did not participate.