Pennwalt Corporation, Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Akzona Incorporated and Armak Company, Appellants/cross-Appellees
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
JACK R. MILLER, Circuit Judge.
Akzona, Incorporated, and its subsidiary, Armak Company (both hereafter referred to as “Armak”), appeal from the decision of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (“district court”) 1 that U.S. Patent No. 4,107,292 2 (“Nemeth patent”) is invalid and that Pennwalt Corporation (“Pennwalt”) is not liable under contract and equity counterclaims of Armak based on state law. Pennwalt cross-* appeals the district court’s decision denying attorney fees. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
Methyl and ethyl parathion are well known insecticides, which are highly…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- American Hoist & Derrick Company, Cross-Appellee v. Sowa & Sons, Inc., Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Stratoflex, Inc. v. Aeroquip CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Barmag Barmer Maschinenfabrik Ag v. Murata MacHinery Ltd., and Murata of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Elizabeth v. Pavement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Paragon Podiatry Laboratory, Inc. v. Klm Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Labounty Manufacturing, Inc. v. United States International Trade Commission, Dudley Shearing MacHine Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
- State Industries, Inc. v. A.O. Smith CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Ralston Purina Company v. Far-Mar-Co, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- In Re Jack E. Caveney and Roy A. MoodyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.