C.R. Bard, Inc. v. M3 Systems, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
157 F.3d 1340
1998-2 Trade Cases P 72,289, 48 U.S.P.Q.2d 1225
C.R. BARD, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
M3 SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
No. 96-1165.
United States Court of Appeals,
Federal Circuit.
Sept. 30, 1998.
John F. Sweeney, Morgan & Finnegan, L.L.P., New York City, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were Harry C. Marcus, Desiree M. Stahl, and Walter G. Hanchuk. Of counsel were Warren H. Rotert and Steven F. Meyer.
Richard D. Harris, Law Offices of Dick and Harris, and Paul E. Slater, Sperling, Slater & Spitz, P.C., Chicago, Illinois, argued for defendant-appellee. With…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part · Mayer; Concurring in part, dissenting in part · Bryson.
2Cases cited115 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Grinnell Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
110 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. Microsoft CorpCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998