Legal Opinion
Pennwalt Corp. v. Akzona Inc.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided August 22, 1983No. Civ. A. 79-157PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LATCHUM, Chief Judge.
Pennwalt Corporation (“Pennwalt”) commenced this patent suit on March 26, 1979 in which it seeks a declaratory judgment of invalidity and unenforceability of U.S. Patent No. 4,196, 292 (“the ’292” or “Nemeth patent”) entitled “Stable Water Dispersions of Encapsulated Parathion,” issued August 15, 1978 to Harold C. Nemeth. (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 1.) The named defendants are Akzona, Inc. (“Akzona”), and its subsidiary Armak Co. (“Armak”). (Id.). The ’292 patent is assigned to Akzona but the parties have agreed that Armak should be treated as the patent owner for…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Kewanee Oil Co. v. Bicron Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Elizabeth v. Pavement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Henry S. Bloomgarden v. Charles B. CoyerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
- Aronson v. Quick Point Pencil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Egbert v. LippmannSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pennwalt Corporation, Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Akzona Incorporated and Armak Company, Appellants/cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Universal Gym Equipment, Inc., Plaintiff-Cross-Appellant v. Erwa Exercise Equipment Limited and Global Gym and Fitness Equipment LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Nordberg Inc. v. Telsmith, Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1995
- PowerOasis v. T-MobileDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2007