Legal Opinion
Ultra-Temp Corp. v. Advanced Vacuum Systems, Inc.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided July 6, 2000No. Civ.A. 93-10102-RBCPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THIS COURT’S DECISION GRANTING ATTORNEY FEES (#245)
COLLINGS, United States Chief Magistrate Judge.
I. Introduction
On September 27, 1999, I issued a Memorandum and Order on defendant Advanced Vacuum Systems’1 Motion for Attorney Fees.2 In its motion, AVS had sought the fees on a number of grounds. The Court found that an award of fees was warranted under Rule 11, Fed.R.Civ.P.,3 because Ultra-*380Temp Corporation4 had failed to conduct an adequate pre-filing investigation into the claims of patent infringement before filing the initial…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Frank Andrews v. Metro North Commuter Railroad Co., Penn Central Corporation, Consolidated Rail Corporation, National Railroad Passenger Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- Tommy Land, Cross-Appellee v. Chicago Truck Drivers, Helpers and Warehouse Workers Union (Independent) Health and Welfare FundCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Richard Silva v. Peter Witschen, City of East Providence, Stephen LinderCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
- Herbert Judin v. The United States, and Hewlett-Packard CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Nisbet v. Van TuylCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1955
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cat3, LLC v. Black Lineage, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- Marshall v. Dentfirst P.C.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2016
- Golub v. Northeastern UniversityDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2020
- Lifchits v. Integon National Insurance Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2020
- Lifchits v. Key 4U Transporation Corp. BusDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.