Benchlight The federal appellate judiciary

This writing

Type
Opinion of the Court
Per curiam
Yes — no individual author
Filed
July 11, 2002
Case
Bissell v. United States
Case status
Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

DECISION PER CURIAM. Alan Bissell and Maureen Lee Bissell (collectively “Bissell”) appeal the decision of the United States Court of Federal Claims, granting the United States’ motion to dismiss Bissell’s design patent infringement claims because they were not filed within the six-year statute of limitations as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2501 (a). Bissell v. United States, No. 00-344C, slip op. at 1 (Ct.App.Fed.Cl.2001). Because the Court of Federal Claims did not err, we ajfirm. BACKGROUND During the relevant time period, Bissell held title, either directly, or indirectly through a company owned by Bissell, to United States Design Patent No. D308,008, claiming an ornamental design for a hose clamp. Bissell’s company marketed firefighting equipment. Bissell attempted to market the hose clamp to the United States Forest Service (“USFS”), a subdivision of the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”). In December 1989, Bissell submitted a prototype of the hose clamp to Mr. Hill at the USFS. Bissell hoped to obtain “replacement item approval” and listing of the hose clamp in a USFS catalog. The government contends that the prototype clamp was returned in March 1990, while Bissell …

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.