Legal Opinion
Honeywell International, Inc. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided November 1, 2005No. CIV.A. 03-242-MPTPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THYNGE, United States Magistrate Judge.
On December 8, 2004, a jury found in favor of plaintiffs Honeywell International, Inc. and Honeywell Intellectual Properties, Inc. (herein collectively referred to as, “Honeywell”), and returned a verdict against defendant Universal Avionics Systems Corporation (herein referred to as, “Universal”) of infringement of Honeywell’s valid U.S. Patent, Number 4,914,436 (herein referred to as, “the ’436 patent”) for developing, marketing and delivering its Terrain Awareness Warning System (“TAWS”). The jury awarded Honeywell reasonable…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Hilton v. BraunskillSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission v. Holiday Tours, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
- Roland MacHinery Company v. Dresser Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- Hybritech Incorporated v. Abbott LaboratoriesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Jerry F. Connell, Gary F. Burns and Conelco, Inc., Appellants/cross-Appellees v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., a Corporation, Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- In re Tribune Co.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · 2012
- Smith & Nephew, Inc. v. Synthes (U.S.A.)District Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2006
- Culp v. StanzialeDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2015
- Polara Engineering, Inc. v. Campbell Co.District Court, S.D. California · 2017
- Veracode, Inc. v. Appthority, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2015
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.