Legal Opinion
Monsanto Company v. Homan McFarling
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided April 9, 2004No. 03-1177, 03-1228PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLEVENGER, Circuit Judge.
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri entered summary judgment against defendant Homan McFarling and in favor of the Monsanto Company (“Monsanto”) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) on some, but not all, of the claims being litigated. See Monsanto Co. v. McFarling, No. 4:00CV84 CDP, 2002 WL 32069634 (E.D.Mo. Nov. 5, 2002) (granting final judgment under Rule 54(b)); (E.D.Mo. Nov. 15, 2002) (granting Monsanto’s motions for summary judgment). The district court held that, when McFarling replanted some of Monsanto’s patented…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- C.R. Bard, Inc. v. M3 Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- B. Braun Medical, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories and Np Medical, Inc., Defendants/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Carbice Corp. of America v. American Patents Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Monsanto Company v. ScruggsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Princo Corp. v. International Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- Farmland Mut. Ins. Co. v. ScruggsMississippi Supreme Court · 2004
- U.S. Philips Corp. v. International Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Monsanto Company v. Kem L. Ralph, (Individually and Doing Business as Ralph Brothers Farms)Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.