Legal Opinion
Cryovac Inc. v. Pechiney Plastic Packaging, Inc.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided April 17, 2006No. CIV.A. 04-1278-KAJPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JORDAN, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This patent infringement case is set to be tried to a jury beginning on June 12, 2006. Plaintiff Cryovac, Inc. (“Cryovac”) has accused defendant Pechiney Plastic Packaging, Inc. (“Pechiney”) of willfully infringing claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 4,755,419 (issued July 5, 1988) (the “ ’419 patent”), and of tortious interference with contract and prospective business relations. (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 185, the “Second Amended Complaint.”) Pechiney has denied infringement and tortious interference, and has counter-claimed that the patent is…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- EMC Corp. v. Pure Storage, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2016
- Sparton Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- Dow Chemical Canada Inc. Ex Rel. Dow Chemical Co. v. HRD Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 2009
- Agrizap, Inc. v. Woodstream Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
- Commissariat À L'Energie Atomique v. Samsung Electronics Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 2007
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.