Legal Opinion
Kabushiki Kaisha Hattori Seiko v. Refac Technology Development Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided July 21, 1988No. 87 Civ. 7891 (MGC)PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
UNSEALED OPINION
CEDARBAUM, District Judge.
Plaintiff and defendants have cross-moved for summary judgment in this action, which turns on the construction of a patent licensing agreement. For the reasons discussed below, plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment is granted and defendants’ motion is denied.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Kabushiki Kaisha Hattori Seiko (“Hattori”) is a trading company engaged in the distribution and sale throughout the world of products including timepieces. Defendants Refac Technology Development Corporation, Refac Electronics Corporation and Refac International, Ltd.…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Lear, Inc. v. AdkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Chimart Associates v. PaulNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Schering Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Home Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
- George Backer Management Corp. v. Acme Quilting Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1978
- United States v. Univis Lens Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Minebea Co., Ltd. v. PapstDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
- Mediterranean Golf, Inc. v. HirshDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1991
- Fuji Photo Film Co. Ltd. v. Jazz Photo Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2003
- Lexmark International, Inc. v. Impression Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- Mid-West Conveyor Co. v. Jervis B. Webb Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.