American Innotek, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
Patent Infringement; 28 U.S.C. § 1498; Motion to Alter or Amend a Judgment; RCFC 59(e); Timeliness; Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment; RCFC 60(b); Obviousness; 35 U.S.C. § 103.
OPINION AND ORDER
MARY ELLEN COSTER WILLIAMS, Judge.
On October 7, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend this Court’s judgment finding Claims 1-4, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 5,116,139 invalid as obvious and denying Plaintiffs claim of patent infringement under 28 U.S.C. § 1498 (2012), Am, Innotek, Inc. v. United States, 128 Fed.Cl. 135, 168-69. Plaintiff argues that this Court erred in finding…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Gonzalez v. CrosbySupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Ackermann v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Q Integrated Companies, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
- Brewer v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021