Nike v. Meitac International Enterprise Co., Ltd
Nike v. Meitac International Enterprise Co., Ltd
Opinion
Error: Expected the default config, but wasn't able to find it, or it isn't a Dictionary
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
2007-1070
NIKE, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
MEITAC INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISE CO., LTD.
and MAN LEE MO,
Defendants-Appellants,
and
IN SHOE, INC.,
Defendant.
ON MOTION Before BRYSON, Circuit Judge, FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and PROST, Circuit Judge. PROST, Circuit Judge.
ORDER
Nike, Inc. moves to dismiss this appeal because Meitac International Enterprise Co., Ltd. et. al. (Meitac) has failed to file their opening brief. Meitac has not responded.
A party’s failure to comply with the court’s rules, including the requirements of preparing and filing briefs, can result in dismissal of an appeal for failure to prosecute. Julien v. Zeringue, 864 F.2d 1572, 1574 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The motion is granted.
(2) All sides shall bear their own costs.
FOR THE COURT
March 19, 2007 /s/ Sharon Prost
Date Sharon Prost
Circuit Judge cc: Erik S. Maurer, Esq.
Ronald M. St. Marie, Esq. s19 ISSUED AS A MANDATE: ______________________ 2007-1070 2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished