Legal Opinion
Joy Technologies, Inc. v. Quigg
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided March 12, 1990No. Civ. A. 88-3656-OGPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
BENNETT, Senior Circuit Judge. *
This patent case is before the court on the summary judgment motion of the defendant Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks. The motion is denied because genuine issues of material fact exist concerning the objective indicia of nonobviousness. It appears from the parties’ submissions that the plaintiff has failed to raise a genuine issue as to many of the other facts essential to deciding the case as a matter of law. Therefore, pursuant to Fed.R. Civ.P. 56(d), those facts shall be deemed established. They are identified in the Memorandum and are set…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Stratoflex, Inc. v. Aeroquip CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Barmag Barmer Maschinenfabrik Ag v. Murata MacHinery Ltd., and Murata of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Joy Technologies, Inc. v. Harry F. Manbeck, Jr., Commissioner of Patents and TrademarksCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
- Glaxo Wellcome, Inc. v. Pharmadyne Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1998
- Joy Technologies, Inc. v. ManbeckDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1990
- Abbott Laboratories v. Diamedix Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1997
- Alberts v. KapposDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.