Case Name: NINESTAR TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD., Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd., and Town Sky, Inc., Appellants, and Dataproducts USA, LLC, Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellee, and Epson Portland Inc., Epson America, Inc., and Seiko Epson Corporation, Intervenors
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-10-30
Citations: 370 F. App'x 81
Docket Number: No. 2009-1549
Parties: NINESTAR TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD., Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd., and Town Sky, Inc., Appellants, and Dataproducts USA, LLC, Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellee, and Epson Portland Inc., Epson America, Inc., and Seiko Epson Corporation, Intervenors.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 370
Pages: 81–81

Head Matter:
NINESTAR TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD., Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd., and Town Sky, Inc., Appellants, and Dataproducts USA, LLC, Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellee, and Epson Portland Inc., Epson America, Inc., and Seiko Epson Corporation, Intervenors.
No. 2009-1549.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Oct. 30, 2009.

Opinion:
ON PETITION FOR HEARING EN BANC
ORDER
Appellants Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd., et al., filed a petition for hearing en banc or, in the alternative, certification to the United States Supreme Court.
Upon consideration thereof, it is
ORDERED that the petition for hearing en banc and request, for certification be, and the same hereby are, DENIED.
The appeal will be heard by a panel. A party may argue to the panel the need to overrule precedent, or other basis for hearing en banc, and the panel, if so convinced, will request a poll on rehearing en banc.