Legal Opinion
Celsis in Vitro, Inc. v. CellzDirect, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided January 9, 2012No. 2010-1547PublishedCited by 119 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion for the court filed by Chief Judge RADER. Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge GAJARSA.
RADER, Chief Judge.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted Celsis In Vitro, Ine.’s (“Celsis”) motion for a preliminary injunction against CellzDirect, Inc. and Invitrogen Corporation, now Life Technologies Corporation (“LTC”). Based on the record, the district court did not abuse its discretion. This court affirms.
I
Celsis is the assignee of U.S. Patent No. 7,604,929 (filed Apr. 21, 2005) (“the '929 patent”), which claims methods for preparing…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Sampson v. MurraySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Ass'n v. Federal Power CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1958
- Energy Capital Corp. (As General Partner of Energy Capital Partners Limited Partnership) v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Conoco, Inc. v. Energy & Environmental International, L.C.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by119 opinions
- Rapid Litigation Management Ltd. v. CellzDirect, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- Metalcraft of Mayville, Inc. v. the Toro CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Trebro Manufacturing, Inc. v. Firefly Equipment, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
- Tinnus Enterprises, LLC v. Telebrands CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Aria Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013
114 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.