Legal Opinion
Diversified Dynamics Corp. v. Wagner Spray Tech Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided July 8, 2004No. 03-1495PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PROST, Circuit Judge.
Diversified Dynamics Corporation (“Diversified”) appeals from the June 6, 2003, grant of summary judgment to Wagner Spray Tech Corporation (‘Wagner”) by the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota dismissing Diversified’s claims for patent infringement. See Diversified Dynamics Corp. v. Wagner Spray Tech Corp., No. 03-CV-1183 (D. Minn. June 6, 2003). Because we conclude that the district court incorrectly construed the release language in a settlement agreement between the two parties, we reverse the district court’s grant of Wagner’s motion for summary…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Moore U.S.A., Inc.,plaintiff-Appellant v. Standard Register Company,defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
- George Hyman Construction Company v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- S O Designs USA, Inc. v. Rollerblade, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
- Servais v. T.J. Management of Minneapolis, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1997
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cascades Av LLC v. Evertz Microsystems Ltd.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 2018
- Cascades AV LLC v. Evertz Microsystems, Ltd.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2018
- Videray Technologies, Inc. v. Viken Detection Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2024