United States Federal Circuit

Because video used in an infringement action was a substitute for a physical model and was created as an aid to the argument of counsel and the explanations of defendants' expert witness, the cost of such video could not be awarded to the prevailing party under 28 U.S.C. section 1920.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/13/2002
• Published 03/13/2002

Judges

• Before MAYER, Chief Judge, DYK and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Eric W. Richardson,Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP, of Cincinnati, OH, argued for plaintiff-appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Paul B. Hunt, Barnes & Thornburg, of Indianapolis, IN, argued for defendants-appellees.   With him on the brief was Andrew B. Dzeguze.