Wilson Sporting Goods Company v. Hillerich & Bradsby Co.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
RADER, Circuit Judge.
In a stipulated Rule 54 judgment, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed with prejudice Wilson’s contentions that softball and baseball bats sold by Hillerich & Bradsby (H & B) infringed claims 1, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 5,415,398 (granted May 16, 1995) (the ’398 patent). In this judgment, the court also granted H & B’s declaratory judgment action that its bats do not infringe the ’398 patent, but dismissed H & B’s cause of action for declaratory judgment of invalidity of the ’398 patent, and awarded costs, exclusive of…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Catlin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by90 opinions
- BMC Resources, Inc. v. Paymentech, L.P.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- Zenith Electronics Corp. v. PDI Communication Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- Aero Products International, Inc. v. Intex Recreation Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- E-Pass Technologies v. 3com Corporation (Also Known as 3com)Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.