Legal Opinion

Hydro-Clear Corp. v. Aer-O-Flo Corp.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided March 31, 1970No. C 69-748PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

LAMBROS, District Judge.

In this motion to dismiss for improper venue of the defendant, Aer-O-Flo Corporation, the basic issue is whether a corporation resides in all the judicial districts of the state of its incorporation for purposes of venue under the venue statute for patent infringement actions. The applicable statute reads as follows:

“Any civil action for patent infringement may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business.” 28…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Products Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Stonite Products Co. v. Melvin Lloyd Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
  3. Schnell v. Peter Eckrich & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
  4. Ruddies v. Auburn Spark Plug Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1966
  5. American Cyanamid Company v. Nopco Chemical Company and Quality Feeds, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1968

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Zin-Plas Corp. v. Plumbing Quality AGF. Co. Ltd.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1985
  2. Jeffrey Galion, Inc. v. Joy Manufacturing Co.District Court, N.D. West Virginia · 1971
  3. General Signal Corp. v. Western Electric Co., Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1973
  4. Sperberg v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1973
  5. Action Communication Systems, Inc. v. Datapoint Corp.District Court, N.D. Texas · 1977

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API