Legal Opinion

NEATO, LLC v. Rocky Mountain Traders

District Court, D. Connecticut

Decided March 27, 2001No. CIV. 3:99CV00377(AVC)Published

1Opinion of the Court

RULING ON THE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

COVELLO, Chief Judge.

This is an action for declaratory relief brought by the plaintiff, Neato, LLC (“Neato”) against the defendant, Rocky Mountain Traders (“RMT”) and Stanley I. Grossman. In it, Neato asks the court to declare United States Patent No. 5,783,033 (“ ’033 patent”) invalid, void and unenforceable. Neato brings the within motion for partial summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, arguing that the ’033 patent is invalid because “in light of the relevant prior art, claims 1-4 ...…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  4. Grishelda Bryant v. John J. Maffucci, Dawn Thackeray, Yvonne Powell, Norwood Jackson and Dr. Edward AllanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
  5. Stratoflex, Inc. v. Aeroquip CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API