Case Name: UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS & PLASTICS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION and UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, Plaintiffs-Cross Appellants, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, Shell Chemical Company, and Cri Catalyst Company, Defendants-Appellants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-01-10
Citations: 434 F.3d 1357
Docket Number: No. 04-1475, 04-1512
Parties: UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS & PLASTICS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION and UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, Plaintiffs-Cross Appellants, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, Shell Chemical Company, and Cri Catalyst Company, Defendants-Appellants.
Judges: Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, MAYER, LOURIE, CLEVENGER, RADER, SCHALL, BRYSON, LINN, DYK, and PROST, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 434
Pages: 1357–1359

Head Matter:
UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS & PLASTICS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION and UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, Plaintiffs-Cross Appellants, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, Shell Chemical Company, and Cri Catalyst Company, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 04-1475, 04-1512.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Jan. 10, 2006.
Harry J. Roper, Jenner & Block LLP, of Chicago, Illinois, argued for plaintiffs-cross appellants. With him on the brief were David R. Bennett, Aaron A. Bárlow, and Raymond N. Nimrod; Paul M. Smith and Marc A. Goldman, of Washington, DC. Of counsel on the brief was Bruce M. Kanuch, The Dow Chemical Company, of Midland, Michigan.
William C. Slusser, Slusser Wilson & Partridge LLP, of Houston, Texas, argued for defendants-appellants. With him on the brief were Jayme Partridge and Jayne Piaña. Of counsel on the brief were John D. Norris and Richard L. Stanley, Howrey LLP, of Houston, Texas. Of counsel were Laura F. Jones, Keith Jaasma and Michael E. Wilson, Slusser Wilson & Patridge LLP, of Houston, Texas.
Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, MAYER, LOURIE, CLEVENGER, RADER, SCHALL, BRYSON, LINN, DYK, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ON PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
SUE L. ROBINSON, Chief Judge.
ORDER
A combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en bane was filed by the Appellants , and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by the Cross Appellants. The petition for rehearing was referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc, amici curiae briefs and response were referred to the circuit judges who are authorized to request a poll whether to rehear the appeal en banc. A poll was requested, taken, and failed.
Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The petition for panel rehearing is denied.
(2) The petition for rehearing en banc is denied.
(3) The mandate of the court will issue on January 17, 2006.
. Amicus Curiae briefs were filed by:
1-The American Intellectual Property Law Association and Federal Circuit Bar Association.
2-M-l L.L.C.
3-Microsoft Corporation.
4-Fédération Internationale des Conseils en Propriété Industrielle.