Legal Opinion
Metso Minerals, Inc. v. Powerscreen International Distribution Ltd.
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided December 8, 2011No. 06-cv-1446 (ADS)(ETB)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
SPATT, District Judge.
The Plaintiff Metso Minerals commenced the present law suit in 2006, alleging that the Defendants Powerscreen International Distribution Limited (“Powerscreen”), Terex Corporation (“Terex”), Powerscreen New York, Inc. (“PSNY”), and Emerald Equipment Systems, Inc. (“Emerald”), manufactured and sold prod*325uets that infringed United States Patent 5,577,618 (the “'618 patent”). Following discovery, claim construction, and summary judgment, the Plaintiff tried its case to a jury in late 2010. At the seven-week trial, among other defenses, the…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- A.C. Aukerman Company v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
- Molins Plc, and John Coventry Smith, Jr. v. Textron, Inc., Kearney & Trecker Corporation, and Avco CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Gardner v. Panama RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Star Scientific, Inc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- CSL Silicones, Inc. v. Midsun Grp. Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2018
- Serby v. First Alert, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2015
- adidas America, Inc. v. Thom Browne, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2022