Legal Opinion
Carroll Touch, Inc. v. Electro Mechanical Systems, Inc.
District Court, C.D. Illinois
Decided September 17, 1991No. 87-2272PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
BAKER, Chief Judge.
Vladeta Lazarevich is listed as a co-inventor of the photoelectric input apparatus described and claimed in the ’443 patent. On April 1, 1978 he assigned his rights to that invention to the plaintiff, Carroll Touch. The validity of this assignment is undisputed. Also on April 1, 1978, Mr. Lazarevich signed a Declaration and Power of Attorney attesting to his belief in the patentability of the invention. Carroll Touch argues that under the doctrine of assignor estoppel, because Lazarevich assigned his rights in the invention and attested to the patentability of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Sun Studs, Inc. v. Ata Equipment Leasing, Inc., Applied Theory, Inc. And U.S. Natural Resources, Inc., Defendants/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989
- Diamond Scientific Co. v. Ambico, Inc. And Clarence Joseph WelterCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Shamrock Technologies, Inc. v. Medical Sterilization, Inc., and Robert S. LuniewskiCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Acoustical Design, Inc. v. Control Electronics Company, Inc., Insul-Art Acoustics Corp., Jack Leonard, and Harold GoldsteinCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- American Fence Co., Inc. v. MRM SEC. Systems, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1989
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Carroll Touch, Inc. v. Electro Mechanical Systems, Inc., Defendant/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Carroll Touch, Inc. v. Electro Mechanical Systems, Inc., Defendant/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993