Grantham v. McGraw-Edison Co.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1Opinion
Memorandum on Petition for Rehearing
2Per curiam
In our analysis of collateral estoppel at part II of our opinion, 444 F.2d 213, we relied on Triplett v. Lowell, 297 U.S. 638, 56 S.Ct. 645, 80 L.Ed. 949 (1936), and related cases for the proposition that mutuality of estoppel is a strict requirement in patent litigation. Since Triplett has been overruled by Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation, 402 U.S. 313, 91 S.Ct. 1434, 28 L.Ed.2d 788 (1971), McGraw-Edison argues that we must reverse our initial decision and affirm the judgment of the district court. We disagree.
An…
3Cases cited5 opinions
- Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois FoundationSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Triplett v. LowellSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Louis M. Prager, Bruce S. Prager, Glenn B. Prager v. El Paso National BankCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Paulette Grantham, Fred Grantham, Charles R. Grantham v. Morgan Linen Serv. Inc., Essick Investment Co., 'Automatic' Sprinkler Corporation of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1970
- West Virginia Northern Railroad Company v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1968