Grain Processing Corporation v. American Maize-Products Company, Defendant/cross-Appellant
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MAYER, Circuit Judge.
These are cross-appeals from a decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana that claims 11-14 of United States Letters Patent No. 3,849,194 (’194 patent) were valid and infringed by the ARD 2370 product made by American Maize-Products Co. The court held, however, that Maize's Fro-Dex 5 and Fro-Dex 10 products did not infringe. We reverse the determination that Fro-Dex 10 did not infringe claims 12-14, and remand for consideration of whether increased damages and attorney fees should be awarded. All other aspects of the district…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Preiser v. NewkirkSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Elizabeth v. Pavement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Autogiro Company of America v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
- Ssih Equipment S.A. v. United States International Trade Commission and Stewart-Warner CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by75 opinions
- Robert Conroy v. Reebok International, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- Al-Site Corporation and Magnivision, Inc. v. Vsi International, Inc. And Myron Orlinsky, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
- Grain Processing Corporation v. American Maize-Products CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
- Spectronics Corporation v. H.B. Fuller Company, Inc., and H.B. Fuller Automotive Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Honeywell International Inc. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.