Legal Opinion
Sylvan R. Shemitz v. Deere & Company, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided May 28, 1980No. 79-1792PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Per curiam
This appeal is taken by the plaintiff from an order of the district court concluding the invalidity of the patent allegedly infringed and granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Measured against the criteria set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 86 S.Ct. 684, 15 L.Ed.2d 545 (1966), the district court determined that the patent in issue was invalid for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Having examined the record, addressed the briefs, and heard oral argument on behalf of the parties, we agree with the district court that the plaintiff has failed to establish a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Wyeth Laboratories v. ReyesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- A R Inc. v. Electro-Voice, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1962
- Research Corporation v. Nasco Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1974
- Davison Chemical Corp. v. Joliet Chemicals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Dennis G. Moore, George R. Moore and Sierra Products, Inc., Plaintiffs- Cross-Appellees v. Wesbar Corporation and Bernard R. Weber, CrossCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- Paone v. Microsoft Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 2012
- Harvestall Industries, Inc. And Vincent B. Steffen v. Levi HochstetlerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
- Toro Co. v. L. R. Nelson Corp.District Court, C.D. Illinois · 1981
- AM International, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1983
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.