Legal Opinion
ClearValue, Inc. v. Pearl River Polymers, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided February 17, 2012No. 2011-1078, 2011-1100PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MOORE, Circuit Judge.
ClearValue, Inc. and Richard Alan Haase (collectively, ClearValue) accused Pearl River Polymers, Inc., et al. (collectively, Pearl River) of indirectly infringing U.S. patent no. 6,120,690 ('690 patent). After a jury found that the '690 patent was valid and indirectly infringed, the district court denied Pearl River’s motions for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) of invalidity and noninfringement. J.A. 5-37. Because the jury’s verdict that the '690 patent was not invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102 was not supported by substantial evidence, we reverse the denial of the motion…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Finjan, Inc. v. Secure Computing Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- ACCO Brands, Inc. v. ABA Locks Manufacturer Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- Celeritas Technologies, Ltd., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Rockwell International CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- In Re GleaveCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
- Z4 Technologies, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Virnetx, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
- Activevideo Networks, Inc. v. Verizon Communications, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
- Broadcom Corporation v. Emulex CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013
- Osram Sylvania, Inc. v. American Induction Technologies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
- E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Unifrax I LLCCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.