Legal Opinion
Krippelz v. Ford Motor Company
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided November 18, 2009No. 98 C 2361PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
JAMES B. ZAGEL, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
This case involves Defendant Ford Motor Company’s “puddle lamps.” Krippelz is the sole inventor and owner of U.S. Patent No. 5,017,903. (PX1, “the '903 patent.”) The puddle lamps installed on many of Ford’s most popular vehicles infringe claim 2 of the '903 patent. Krippelz sued Ford on April 16, 1998 for infringement of the '903 patent. (Dkt. No. 1, 4/16/98 Complaint.)
This Court granted Krippelz’s motion for summary judgment of infringement of all accused models on November 21, 2008. (11/21/08 Hr’g Tr.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L. L. C.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Hoechst Celanese Corporation v. Bp Chemicals Limited and Sterling Chemicals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Underwater Devices Incorporated v. Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc., Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc. v. Lester A. Haug, Don W. Schmid and Herman GuntherCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Seachange International, Inc. v. C-Cor, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- L.A. Gear, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Thom McAn Shoe Company and Melville Corporation and Pagoda Trading Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cunney v. BD. OF TRUSTEES OF VILLAGE OF GRAND VIEWCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011
- Krippelz v. Ford Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
- Dataquill Ltd. v. High Tech Computer Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 2011
- Veracode, Inc. v. Appthority, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2015
- In re Method of Processing Ethanol Byproducts & Related Subsystems ('858) Patent Litig.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 2014
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.