about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable [trier of fact] could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); see also Eli Lilly & Co. v. Barr Labs., Inc., 251 F.3d 955, 971 (Fed.Cir.2001); Gen. Elec. Co. v. Nintendo Co., 179 F.3d 1350, 1353 (Fed.Cir.1999). If the nonmoving party produces sufficient evidence to raise a question as to the outcome of the case, the motion for summary judgment should be denied. “The moving party in a summary judgment motion has the burden to show ‘that there is an absence of evidence to support the non-moving party’s case[.]’ ” Crown Operations Int’l v. Solutia Inc., 289 F.3d 1367, 1377 (Fed.Cir.20 1358, 1361 (Fed.Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). The purpose of summary judgment is “ ‘to
holding that in determining the propriety of summary judgment credibility determinations may not be made  holding that credibility determinations are for the jury holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if the resolution of material issues depends upon credibility determinations holding that summary judgment is not appropriate where matters of credibility and determining the weight of the evidence exist holding that credibility determinations should not be resolved at the summary judgment stage