Legal Opinion

Wayne Automation Corp. v. R.A. Pearson Co.

District Court, E.D. Washington

Decided March 12, 1991No. CS-90-345-JLQPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STAY

QUACKENBUSH, Chief Judge.

BEFORE THE COURT is plaintiff’s Motion to Stay the above-entitled matter pending reexamination of the validity of plaintiff’s patents in the United States Patent and Trademark Office heard telephonically on March 11, 1991. Frederick J. Olsson appeared for plaintiff. Richard J. St. John represented defendant. Having reviewed the record, heard from counsel and being fully advised in this matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s Motion to Stay (Ct.Rec. 9) is DENIED for the following reasons.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Wayne…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ethicon, Inc. v. Donald J. Quigg, Commissioner of Patents & Trademarks and the United States Patent & Trademark OfficeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
  2. Gould v. Control Laser Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ascii Corp. v. Std Entertainment USA, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1994
  2. In Re Laughlin Products, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. Lentek International, Inc. v. Sharper Image Corp.District Court, M.D. Florida · 2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API