Legal Opinion
Rodgard Corp. v. Miner Enterprises, Inc.
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided December 29, 1995No. 1:84-cv-00397PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
ELFVIN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Rodgard Corporation (“Rod-gard”) and its erstwhile employee Winfield brought this action requesting either that United States Patent No. 4,198,037 (“The Patent”) be corrected as a result of the defendants’ failure to comply with the joint-inventorship provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 116 or that a certificate issue declaring Winfield— who died December 16,1992 — to have been a joint inventor pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 256 or that The Patent be declared invalid due to the defendant Anderson’s intentional failure to name…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Cardinal Chemical Co. v. Morton International, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Walker v. SheldonNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
- Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Arrowhead Industrial Water, Inc. v. Ecolochem, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Travellers International, A.G. And Windsor, Inc. v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- St. John's University, New York v. BoltonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2010
- Bausch & Lomb Inc. v. Alcon Laboratories, Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 1999
- Heden v. HillDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1996
- United States v. CassoDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1998
- Pauwels v. Bank of New York Mellon CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2021