Legal Opinion

Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Sudbury Systems, Inc.

District Court, D. Connecticut

Decided November 8, 2000No. 3:95-cv-00276PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S AND THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT’S COUNTERCLAIM AND THIRD-PARTY CLAIM [DKT. NO. 147]

HALL, District Judge.

This case arises from a patent dispute. The plaintiff, Pitney Bowes, Inc. (“Pit-ney”), originally sued the defendant, Sud-bury Systems, Inc. (“Sudbury”), alleging that Sudbury intentionally interfered with Pitney’s advantageous business relationships with prospective buyers of its wholly owned subsidiary, Dictaphone Corporation (“Dictaphone”), and that a patent owned by Sudbury was invalid and unenforceable. Sudbury filed a…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
  4. Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
  5. Blessing v. FreestoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1997

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. SuperGuide Corp. v. DIRECTV ENTERPRISES, INC.District Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API