Legal Opinion
Maxwell v. J. Baker, Inc.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided September 21, 1992No. Civ. 4-90-941PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
DOTY, District Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion for partial summary judgement. Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court grants in part and denies in part defendants’ motion for partial summary judgement.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Susan M. Maxwell (Maxwell) is the owner of record and named inventor on United States Patent No. 4,624,060 (the ’060 patent), which claims a system for attaching together mated pairs of shoes. 1 Defendant J. Baker, Inc. (“J. Baker”) is a corporation that sells shoes through large discount retail stores, such as…
2Cases cited12 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
- Dunlap v. SchofieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Motorola, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Wine Railway Appliance Co. v. Enterprise Railway Equipment Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- American Medical Systems, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Medical Engineering CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Spectramed, Inc. v. Gould Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1998
- Maxwell v. K Mart Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1995
- Endress + Hauser, Inc. v. Hawk Measurement Systems Pty. Ltd.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 1995
- Spectramed, Inc. v. Gould, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1998