Legal Opinion
Hitkansut LLC v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided October 21, 2014No. 12-303CPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
LETTOW, Judge.
Pending before the court are four motions reflecting disputes over pre-trial discovery in this patent case. The parties have been pursuing discovery to prepare for a potential future trial over whether the government, acting through Oak Ridge National Laboratory (“Oak Ridge” or “the government”), has infringed United States Patent No. 7,175,722 (“the ’722 patent”), entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Stress Relief Using Multiple Energy Sources.” In the first motion, plaintiffs Hitkansut LLC and Acceledyne Technologies, Ltd., LLC (collectively, “Hitkansut”)…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- United States v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Totten v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- William O. Schism and Robert Reinlie v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Truswal Systems Corp. v. Hydro-Air Engineering, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Micro Motion, Incorporated v. Kane Steel Co., Inc., Cross/appellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hitkansut LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- Hitkansut LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
- New Orleans Regional Physician Hospital Organization, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Herrmann v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- 3rd Eye Surveillance, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2019
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.