Legal Opinion
Rohm and Haas Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided June 30, 1989No. Civ. A. 78-384-JLL, 79-397-JLLPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LATCHUM, Senior District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
These consolidated actions 1 involve the validity and infringement of six U.S. patents issued over the past 13 years. The actions were filed by the Rohm and Haas Company 2 on September 11,1978 (C.A. No. 78-384-JLL) seeking a declaratory judgment that one of the patents in suit, U.S. Patent 3,979,437, was invalid, unenforceable and not infringed (Docket Item [“D.I.”] I), 3 and by the Mobil Oil Corporation 4 on August 14, 1979 (C.A. No. 79-397-JLL) for infringement of three other U.S. Patents. The answers and counterclaims in these suits and…
2Cases cited104 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Sri International v. Matsushita Electric Corporation of America and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- American Hoist & Derrick Company, Cross-Appellee v. Sowa & Sons, Inc., Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Lear, Inc. v. AdkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
99 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Curtis Manufacturing Co. v. Plasti-Clip Corp.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1994
- Imperial Chemical Industries, PLC v. Danbury Pharmacal, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1990
- Imperial Chemical Industries, PLC v. Danbury Pharmacal, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1991
- Ciena Corp. v. Corvis Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 2004