Legal Opinion

Budnick Converting, Inc. v. Nebula Glass International, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Illinois

Decided March 30, 2012No. Case No. 09-cv-646-DRHPublishedCited by 4 opinions

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

  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. Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
  5. Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. National Tank Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re MossUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 2018
  2. Clay Financial, LLC v. MandellDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2018
  3. Ellengee Market Co. v. Phenix Specialty Films, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2021
  4. Treehouse Foods, Inc. v. SunOpta Grains and Food, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API