Legal Opinion
In Re Convertible Rowing Exerciser Patent Litigation
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided August 31, 1989No. Misc. 85-14PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LONGOBARDI, Chief Judge.
This opinion addresses an issue of first impression raised in a summary judgment motion by Defendants Ajay Enterprises Corporation and Weslo, Inc. in a dispute involving the alleged validity and infringement of U.S. Patent No. 4,477,071 (the “ ’071 patent”). The ultimate determination of the issue may affect the emerging patent litigation strategy of “testing the water” on patent validity, enforceability and infringement issues 1 before the International Trade Commission (“ITC”). The precise question before the Court is whether the determination of the ITC…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois FoundationSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Tennessee Valley Authority v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re Convertible Rowing Exerciser Patent LitigationDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1993
- Baltimore Luggage Co. v. Samsonite Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1989
- Code Alarm, Inc. v. Directed Electronics, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1996