Legal Opinion
Hewlett-Packard Company v. Repeat-O-Type Stencil Manufacturing Corporation, Inc. And Fred Keen
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided October 14, 1997No. 96-1379PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LOURIE, Circuit Judge.
Hewlett-Packard Company (HP) appeals from the summary judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, holding that Repeat-O-Type (ROT) does not infringe any of the asserted patents by modifying and reselling HP’s ink jet cartridges. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Repeat-O-Type, Inc., No. 92-CV-3330 (N.D.Cal. Apr. 17, 1996). Because ROT’s modification does not constitute impermissible reconstruction and because HP has failed to raise genuine issues of material fact regarding infringement of any of the patents in suit, we affirm.
BACKGROUND
HP…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Robert Conroy v. Reebok International, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- United States v. Univis Lens Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Amgen Inc., Plaintiff-Cross v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc. (Now Known as Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) and Transkaryotic Therapies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Zenith Electronics Corp. v. PDI Communication Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Tyco Fire Products LP v. Victaulic Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
- Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd. v. International Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- United States Surgical Corp. v. Orris, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1998
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.