Legal Opinion · Dissent

Douglas Dynamics, LLC v. Buyers Products Co.

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Decided May 21, 2013No. 2011-1291, 2012-1046, 2012-1057, 2012-1087, 2012-1088Published

1DissentMayer, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent. Because Douglas Dynamics, LLC (“Douglas”) failed to meet the prerequisites for injunctive relief set forth in eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388, 391, 126 S.Ct. 1837, 164 L.Ed.2d 641 (2006), the district court properly denied its request for a permanent injunction. The trial court also correctly determined that the snowplow assemblies manufactured by Buyers Products Company (“Buyers”) do not infringe claim 45 of U.S. Reissue Patent No. 35,700 (the “'700 patent”) because that claim requires a direct connection between the snowplow frames. I would affirm.

I

Bec…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Weinberger v. Romero-BarceloSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L. L. C.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
  3. Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed FarmsSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  4. Bell Communications Research, Inc. v. Vitalink Communications CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
  5. Merck & Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API