Legal Opinion
Hitkansut LLC v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided January 27, 2017No. 12-303CPublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Post-trial decision in a patent case; 28 U.S.C. § 1498; infringement; patent-eligible subject matter; nonobviousness; enablement; reasonable and entire compensation
OPINION AND ORDER 1
LETTOW, Judge.
This post-trial decision addresses plaintiffs’ claim for damages attributable to alleged in fringement of a patent for a method of processing materials, specifically including metal parts, to improve their properties. Plaintiffs, Hitkansut LLC and Acceledyne Technologies, Ltd. LLC (collectively, “Hitkansut”), allege that the United States, acting through Oak Ridge National Laboratory (“Oak Ridge” or…
2Cases cited84 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
- KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012
79 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Fastship, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
- Hitkansut LLC v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020
- 3rd Eye Surveillance, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018
- 3rd Eye Surveillance, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021
- 3rd Eye Surveillance, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2020
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.