Legal Opinion
Parker-Hannifin Corp. v. Samuel Moore & Co.
District Court, N.D. Ohio
Decided April 8, 1977No. Civ. A. C76-1332PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
KRUPANSKY, Judge.
This is a patent proceeding wherein plaintiff seeks declaratory judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, declaring that defendant’s patents are invalid and that plaintiff’s devices do not infringe those patents. The Complaint further demands injunctive relief, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1338.
The matters here in issue are also the subject of a pending action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division. The pendency of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hoffman v. BlaskiSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Kerotest Manufacturing Co. v. C-O-Two Fire Equipment Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Shutte v. Armco Steel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
- Edward A. Martin v. Graybar Electric Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1959
- Barber-Greene Company v. Blaw-Knox Company and All Purpose Spreader CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1957
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Thompson v. BoggsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Plating Resources, Inc. v. UTI Corp.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1999
- Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1983
- Diebold, Inc. v. Firstcard Financial Services, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2000
- Lanehart v. DevineDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1984
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.