Case Name: CVI/BETA VENTURES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, Marchon Eyewear, Inc., Marcolin USA, Inc., and Rothandberg, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. TURA LP and Brodart Co., Defendants-Appellants, and Arthur Brody, Defendant, and Bracken Opticians, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1997-08-13
Citations: 120 F.3d 1260
Docket Number: No. 96-1167
Parties: CVI/BETA VENTURES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, Marchon Eyewear, Inc., Marcolin USA, Inc., and Rothandberg, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. TURA LP and Brodart Co., Defendants-Appellants, and Arthur Brody, Defendant, and Bracken Opticians, Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 120
Pages: 1260–1262

Head Matter:
CVI/BETA VENTURES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, Marchon Eyewear, Inc., Marcolin USA, Inc., and Rothandberg, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. TURA LP and Brodart Co., Defendants-Appellants, and Arthur Brody, Defendant, and Bracken Opticians, Defendant.
No. 96-1167.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Aug. 13, 1997.
James J. Maune, Brumbaugh, Graves, Do-nohue & Raymond, New York City, for plaintiff-appellee CVI/BETA Ventures, Inc. Of counsel was David T. Cunningham.
Edgar H. Haug, Curtis, Morris & Safford, P.C., New York City, for plaintiffs-appellees Marchon Eyewear, Inc., Marcolin U.S.A., Inc. and Rothandberg, Inc. Of counsel were John R. Lane, Daniel G. Brown, and Yvonne K. Tran. Also of counsel were Robert J. Mathias, Piper & Marbury, L.L.P., Baltimore, MD, Robert J. Koch, Fulbright & Ja-worski, L.L.P., Washington, DC, and Daniel J. Leffell, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton, & Garrison, New York City.
Donald R. Dunner, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P., Washington, DC, for defendants-appellants. Of counsel was Darrel C. Karl.

Opinion:
ORDER
A combined petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc having been filed by the APPELLEE, and a response thereto having been invited by the court and filed the APPELLANT, and the petition for rehearing having been referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the suggestion for rehearing in banc and response having been referred to the circuit judges authorized to request a poll whether to rehear the appeal in banc, and a poll having been requested, taken, and failed, it is
ORDERED that the petition for rehearing be, and the same hereby is, DENIED, and it is further
ORDERED that the suggestion for rehearing in banc be, and the same hereby is, DECLINED.