Caddock v. Hy-Meg Corp.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ASPEN, District Judge:
Plaintiffs Richard E. Caddock and Cad-dock Electronics, Inc. bring this patent infringement action against defendants HyMeg Corporation, Gregory Rebchook and Vincent Cupidro. Plaintiffs allege that a resistor made and sold by the Hy-Meg Corporation (“Hy-Meg resistor”) infringes on plaintiffs’ patent of a non-inductive film-type cylindrical resistor (“Caddock resistor”). Defendants move for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.
I
Summary judgment is appropriate only where the moving party demonstrates that no…
2Cases cited16 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
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Sanitary Refrigerator Co. v. WintersSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Charles DALE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHICAGO TRIBUNE COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kasper v. Cooper Canada Ltd.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1988