Legal Opinion
Larami Ltd. v. Ohio Art Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided July 8, 2003No. Civil Action 03-2773 (JEI)PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
IRENAS, District Judge.
Presently before this Court is a motion for a preliminary injunction filed by Plaintiff Larami Ltd. (“Larami”), maker of Super Soaker water guns, claiming that Defendant Ohio Art Company (“Ohio Art”) is infringing on its patents with its A.R.M. 4000XL water gun (“A.R.M.”). Specifically, Larami claims that Ohio Art is infringing on two of its patents, No. 5,799,827 (the “827 patent”) and No. 5,339,987 (the “987 patent”). The Court will deny Plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction.
I
Ohio Art is a longtime toy manufacturer best known for its Etch A Sketch…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- amazon.com, Inc. v. barnesandnoble.com, Inc. And barnesandnoble.com, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Mas-Hamilton Group v. Lagard, Inc., (Now Known as Masco Corporation) and Hi-Shear Technology CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Reebok International Ltd. v. J. Baker, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- Nutrition 21 v. The United States of America v. Thorne Research, Inc., Albert F. CzapCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- High Tech Medical Instrumentation, Inc. v. New Image Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Aptiv Technologies AG v. Microchip Technology, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2024