Legal Opinion
Precision Metal Fabricators, Inc. v. Jetstream Systems Co.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided February 8, 1988No. C 86 4516 AJZPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ZIRPOLI, District Judge.
This is an action commenced by plaintiff, Precision Metal Fabricators, Inc. (hereinafter “Precision”), against defendants Jet-stream Systems Company (hereinafter “Jetstream”), and Stanley Lenox, for infringement of three U.S. patents, Nos. 4,347,022 (the “ ’022 patent”), 4,456,406 (the “’406 patent”), and 4,568,223 (the “’223 patent”). This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a).
Defendants have moved for summary judgment on the ground that Jetstream’s air conveying equipment does not infringe plaintiff’s…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Sri International v. Matsushita Electric Corporation of America and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Barmag Barmer Maschinenfabrik Ag v. Murata MacHinery Ltd., and Murata of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Boyden Power-Brake Co. v. Westinghouse Westinghouse v. Boyden Power-Brake Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Curtis Manufacturing Co. v. Plasti-Clip Corp.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1994
- Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2004
- Vitronics v. ConceptronicDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1995