Legal Opinion
Markman v. Lehman
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided December 3, 1997No. CIV.A. 96-2635 (JR)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
ROBERTSON, District Judge.
This is an action for review under 35 U.S.C. § 145 of a Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (“Board”) decision rejecting all fifteen claims in United States Patent No. Re.33,054 (“the ’054 patent”) for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The ’054 patent was before the PTO on reexamination pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 301-07. The relief plaintiff seeks is an order compelling the PTO to issue a reexamination certificate. This memorandum sets forth the Court’s findings of facts and conclusions of law after a bench trial…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Carroll Touch, Inc. v. Electro Mechanical Systems, Inc., Defendant/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Company v. Phillips Petroleum Company, Phillips 66 Company, and Phillips Driscopipe, Inc., Defendants-Cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- In Re David C. PaulsenCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- Dr. Sakharam D. Mahurkar v. C.R. Bard, Inc., Davol Inc. And Bard Access Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- STX, Inc. v. Brine, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 1999
- Hitachi Koki Co., Ltd. v. DollDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Glaxo Wellcome, Inc. v. Pharmadyne Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1998
- Alberts v. KapposDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- Leviton Manufacturing Co. v. Universal Security Instruments, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2004