In Nystrom V

Multiple Choice

In Nystrom v.Trex Company,where Nystrom sued Trex for patent infringement on an exterior flooring board,the appeals court held that Nystrom's patent:

A) failed for obviousness,so there was no fringement
B) failed because it was prior art,so there was no infringement
C) was valid,so the infringement claim could proceed
D) was infringed by Trex,but there was no evidence of financial harm,so no damages
E) none of the other choices