Dow Corning Corp. v. Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Michigan
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THOMAS L. LUDINGTON, District Judge.
This case arises from Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc.’s (“Weather Shield”) interest beginning in about September 2002 in using a silicone sealant known a “InstantGlaze” as a bedding or glazing compound in the manufacture of windows and doors. Dow Corning Corporation manufactures InstantGlaze and, of course, was interested in selling its product for Weather Shield’s application.
Dow Corning had reason to believe InstantGlaze would perform well in this application…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,768 Phil A. Street and Clyde H. Street v. J.C. Bradford & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Adkins v. WoleverCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
- Forge v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1998
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Softub, Inc. v. Mundial, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2014
- Action Group, Inc. v. NanoStatics Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2013
- United States v. Maritime Exch. MuseumDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2018
- Hill v. Bayer CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2020
- Prudential Defense Solutions Inc. v. GrahamDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2021
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.