Legal Opinion

Monsanto Co. v. Scruggs

District Court, N.D. Mississippi

Decided September 4, 2001No. 1:00-cr-00161PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PEPPER, District Judge.

This cause is before the Court on the plaintiffs Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. The Court, having reviewed the motion, the response, the briefs of the parties, the authorities cited, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, finds as follows, to-wit:

FACTS

This case involves a dispute between the parties over the defendants’ unlicensed use of plaintiffs patented technology as incorporated into various agricultural products, specifically Roundup Ready® soybean and cotton seed, and Bollgard® cotton seed. Plaintiff asserts that the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Morton Salt Co. v. G. S. Suppiger Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
  3. Hybritech Incorporated v. Monoclonal Antibodies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
  4. United Shoe MacHinery Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  5. Hybritech Incorporated v. Abbott LaboratoriesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Farmland Mut. Ins. Co. v. ScruggsMississippi Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Monsanto Co. v. ScruggsDistrict Court, N.D. Mississippi · 2004
  3. Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Ass'n v. Lexmark International, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2003
  4. Monsanto Co. v. ParrDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2008
  5. Mitchell Scruggs v. Greg BostMississippi Supreme Court · 2014

3 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