Legal Opinion

Rainworks Ltd. v. Mill-Rose Co.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided March 31, 2009No. Case No. 1:06CV1549PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court upon the Motion (ECF DKT # 99) of Defendants, Gutterpiller, Inc. (“GPI”), Wilmington International, Inc. and Thomas Duffy, for Partial Summary Judgment on Counts 1, 2, 10, and 14 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint and the Motion (ECF DKT # 118) of Defendant, The Mill-Rose Company (“Mill-Rose”), for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement, Invalidity, and Unenforceability of the '068 Patent, No Breach of Contract, and No Tortious Interference With Contract (Counts 1, 2, 8 and 12 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Keith Harbin-Bey v. Lyle RutterCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
  5. Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Pactiv Corp. v. Multisorb Technologies, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API