Legal Opinion

Schawbel Corp. v. Conair Corp.

District Court, D. Massachusetts

Decided November 13, 2000No. Civ.A. 00-11112-PBSPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SARIS, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Schawbel Corporation alleges that Defendant Conair Corporation has infringed twelve claims involving four of Schawbel’s patents relating to butane-powered curling irons. 1 Schawbel moves for a preliminary injunction, arguing that Co-nair’s continued infringement will likely force Schawbel to go out of business. Although not waiving its other claims, Schawbel relies on Claim 7 of the ’123 patent as its best case for infringement for purposes of preliminary relief. Conair disputes infringement and also contends that Schawbel’s…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
  2. Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
  3. Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
  4. Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  5. The Read Corporation and F.T. Read & Sons, Inc. v. Portec, Inc., D/B/A Portec/kolberg DivisionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Optos, Inc. v. TOPCON MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2011
  2. Young v. Lumenis, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2004
  3. Maine Pointe, LLC v. CollinsDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API