Legal Opinion

Oster v. Grant-Southern Iron & Metal Co.

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided March 11, 1974No. Civ. A. No. 38273Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

GUBOW, District Judge.

This is an action for patent infringement in which Plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief and damages. Jurisdiction is based on United States patent law, particularly 35 U.S.C. § 271 and 281 and 28 U.S.C. § 1338. The Defendant has moved for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Title 28 U.S.C.

The following chain of events lead to the parties in this action:

Plaintiff Earl A. Oster invented a process for fragmentizing metal. He obtained a patent for this process. It should be noted that the patent covers the process…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hunt v. Armour & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1951
  2. Edison Electric Light Co. v. Peninsular Light, Power & Heat Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1900
  3. General Electric Co. v. Continental Lamp Works, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
  4. Popsicle Corp. v. WeissDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1929

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API