Met-Coil Systems Corporation v. Korners Unlimited, Inc. And Ductmate Industries, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
NIES, Circuit Judge.
The determinative issue in this appeal is whether a patent owner’s unrestricted sale of a machine useful only in practicing the claimed inventions presumptively carries with it an implied license under the patent. The United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania decided that legal issue in the affirmative. 1 We affirm.
I
Met-Coil Systems Corp. is the assignee of U.S. Patent No. 4,466,641, which claims an apparatus and method for connecting sections of metal ducts of the kind used in heating and air conditioning systems. Under the claimed inventions,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. Univis Lens Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Bandag, Inc., Appellee/cross-Appellant. v. Al Bolser's Tire Stores, Inc., Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Leitch Manufacturing Co. v. Barber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- B. B. Chemical Co. v. EllisSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Dynamics Corporation of America, as Successor in Interest to International Fermont, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1968
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by131 opinions
- Joy Technologies, Inc., and A/s Niro Atomizer, Involuntary v. Flakt, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Bp Chemicals Limited v. Union Carbide CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Dynacore Holdings Corp. v. U.S. Philips Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
- Epcon Gas Systems, Inc. And Norman S. Loren v. Bauer Compressors, Inc., Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- C.R. Bard, Inc. v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
126 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.