Legal Opinion
Louis C. Stukenborg v. Teledyne, Inc., a Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided April 12, 1971No. 24389PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge:
This is an appeal from a final partial summary judgment (Rule 54(b) F.R.Civ.P.) in a patent infringement case. We affirm. Appellants are the owners and the exclusive licensee of Patent Number 2,843,408 (the '408 patent). They brought this action against appellee Teledyne, Inc., for inducement of infringement and contributory infringement of claims 5, 6, and 7 of the patent, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(b), (c), 281. Teledyne filed a motion for partial summary judgment under F.R.Civ.P. 56(b), which was granted.
Claims 5-7 of the ’408 patent have previously been litigated in the Court…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Mercoid Corp. v. Mid-Continent Investment Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Lincoln Engineering Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United States v. Univis Lens Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Met-Coil Systems Corporation v. Korners Unlimited, Inc. And Ductmate Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Super Products Corporation, a Wisconsin Corporation v. D P Way Corporation, a Wisconsin CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
- General Electric Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1978
- Sharper Image Corp. v. Target Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2006
- Wells Mfg. Corp., a Wisconsin Corporation v. Littelfuse, Inc., a Texas CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1976
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.