Legal Opinion
Pequignot v. SOLO CUP COM.
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided August 25, 2009No. 1:07cv897 (LMB/TCB)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
LEONIE M. BRINKEMA, District Judge.
Before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons stated in open court, as supplemented by this Memorandum Opinion, defendant’s motion has been granted, and plaintiffs motion has been denied.
I.Background.
A. Introduction.
Plaintiff Matthew Pequignot (“Pequignot”) has brought this qui tam action under 35 U.S.C. § 292 against defendant Solo Cup Company (“Solo”), a manufacturer of disposable cups, bowls, plates, and utensils. Section 292 prohibits false patent marking done “for the purpose of deceiving the…
2Cases cited24 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Star Scientific, Inc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Fairfax's v. Hunter's LesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1813
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pequignot v. Solo Cup Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- Rogers v. TRISTAR PRODUCTS, INC.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011