You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Candela Laser Corporation and Gaelis Corporation v. Cynosure, Inc.

Citations: 56 F.3d 82; 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 19645; 1995 WL 298916Docket: 94-1514

Court: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit; May 11, 1995; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Candela Laser Corporation and Gaelis Corporation, the plaintiffs-appellants, filed an appeal against Cynosure, Inc., the defendant-appellee, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case number is 94-1514, and the judgment was rendered on May 11, 1995, by Circuit Judges Rich, Lourie, and Rader. The court affirmed the lower court's decision without providing a detailed opinion, as indicated by the use of Fed. Cir. R. 36. Additionally, the document includes a notice about the non-precedential nature of the opinion, stating that it cannot be cited as precedent, though it allows for the assertion of certain legal doctrines based on nonprecedential decisions.

Legal Issues Addressed

Assertion of Legal Doctrines from Non-Precedential Decisions

Application: While the opinion is non-precedential, it permits the assertion of certain legal doctrines based on nonprecedential decisions.

Reasoning: Though it allows for the assertion of certain legal doctrines based on nonprecedential decisions.

Non-Precedential Opinions

Application: The opinion issued by the court in this case was non-precedential, meaning it cannot be cited as precedent in future cases.

Reasoning: Additionally, the document includes a notice about the non-precedential nature of the opinion, stating that it cannot be cited as precedent.

Use of Rule 36 in Appeals

Application: The appellate court used Rule 36 to affirm the lower court's decision without issuing a detailed opinion.

Reasoning: The court affirmed the lower court's decision without providing a detailed opinion, as indicated by the use of Fed. Cir. R. 36.