Legal Opinion
Agrizap, Inc. v. Woodstream Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided October 19, 2006No. Civil Action 04-3925Published
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
ROBERT F. KELLY, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff Agrizap, Inc. (“Agrizap”) alleges that Defendant Woodstream Corpora tion (“Woodstream”) infringed on its U.S. Patent No. 5,949,636 entitled “portable pest electrocution device with resistive switch trigger” (“636 patent” or “Rat Zapper”). Presently pending before this Court is Woodstream’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Patent Nonin-fringement. For the following reasons, Woodstream’s Motion is denied in part and granted in part.
I. BACKGROUND
The relationship between Agrizap and Woodstream began in 2000. Woodstream contacted…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Sage Products, Inc. v. Devon Industries, Inc., Defendant/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.