Velo-Bind, Inc. v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge:
In No. 79-4448 appellants (hereinafter 3M) appeal from the district court’s judgment, entered following a jury trial, finding that the 3M Model 1000 binding machine infringes three valid patents owned by Velo-Bind, awarding damages to Velo-Bind of $3,934,333 plus interest, and permanently enjoining 3M from infringing the patents. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
In No. 79-4584 3M further appeals from the district court’s refusal to modify the injunction so as to specifically exempt 3M’s proposed 1000DA binding machine from its terms. We affirm.
In No. 79-3338…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- International Salt Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Regal Knitwear Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Rite-Hite Corp. v. Kelley Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- The Perkin-Elmer Corporation, a Corporation of New York v. Computervision Corporation, a Corporation of DelawareCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Jerry F. Connell, Gary F. Burns and Conelco, Inc., Appellants/cross-Appellees v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., a Corporation, Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Envirotech Corporation v. Al George, Incorporated and Monosep, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Lam, Inc. v. Johns-Manville Corporation and Johns-Manville Sales CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.