Budnick Converting, Inc. v. Nebula Glass International, Inc.
District Court, S.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
HERNDON, Chief Judge:
This case is sticky. Nebula Glass International, Inc., d/b/a/ Glasslam (“Glasslam”) sought to create a new product — the “Air*981Tight” — that required, among other things, a specialized double-sided tape that could withstand certain conditions. Accordingly, Glasslam considered several products and ultimately decided to look into a tape^ — the 4965 — provided by Bud-nick Coverting, Inc. (“Budnick”) but manufactured by Tesa Tape, Inc. (“Tesa”). Glasslam tested the tape to ensure it was suitable for its application but then decided the tape, which had a red liner, needed a…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. National Tank Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1982
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re MossUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 2018
- Clay Financial, LLC v. MandellDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2018
- Ellengee Market Co. v. Phenix Specialty Films, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2021
- Treehouse Foods, Inc. v. SunOpta Grains and Food, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2019