Legal Opinion
Micro Motion, Inc. v. Exac Corp.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided February 27, 1991No. C-89-1825 WHOPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
ORRICK, District Judge.
This is the damages phase of a bifurcated patent infringement action involving Coriolis mass flowmeters, which measure the mass flow rate of liquids. Since 1977, plaintiff, Micro Motion, Incorporated (“Micro Motion”), a Colorado corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Emerson Electric Company (“Emerson Electric”) since 1984, has manufactured and sold Coriolis mass flowmeters and their accessories. Defendant, Exac Corporation (“Exac”), a California corporation, began to design Coriolis mass flowmeters in 1983, and to manufacture and market them…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1970
- General Motors Corp. v. Devex Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Panduit Corp. v. Stahlin Bros. Fibre Works, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1978
- 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
- Underwater Devices Incorporated v. Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc., Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc. v. Lester A. Haug, Don W. Schmid and Herman GuntherCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Brunswick Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1996
- Boeing Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- Mars, Inc. v. Coin Acceptors, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2007
- Honeywell International Inc. v. Hamilton Sundstrand Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 2001
- WR Grace & Co.-Conn. v. Intercat, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.