Legal Opinion
Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., Defendant/cross-Appellant
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided July 3, 1996No. 95-1242, 95-1311PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RADER, Circuit Judge.
Litton Systems, Inc. (Litton) appeals a decision of the United States District Court for the Central District of California. After a jury verdict in favor of Litton, the trial court determined as a matter of law that Honeywell did not infringe Litton’s U.S. Patent No. Re. 32,849 (’849 reissue) and U.S. Patent No. 4,142,958 (the ’958 patent). The trial court also held the ’849 reissue unenforceable for inequitable conduct. With respect to federal law claims, the trial court applied the doctrine of intervening rights and granted Honeywell a new trial on damages.
With respect…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Byrd v. Blue Ridge Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Kingsdown Medical Consultants, Ltd. And E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Hollister IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- United States Surgical Corporation v. Ethicon, Inc. And Johnson & Johnson Hospital Services, Inc., Defendants/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Larson Manufacturing Co. of South Dakota, Inc. v. Aluminart Products Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
- United States v. ClarkCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
- Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health, Inc. v. Schering-Plough Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1997
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.