Legal Opinion

Dow Agrosciences LLC v. Crompton Corp.

District Court, S.D. Indiana

Decided July 6, 2005No. 1:03-CV-0654-SEB-JPGPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

ENTRY ON CLAIM CONSTRUCTION GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY IUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

BARKER, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court requiring us to construe a certain patent term integral to the underlying infringement action. Plaintiff Dow Agrosciences LLC (“Dow”) and Defendants Crompton Corporation (“Crompton”) and Uniroyal Chemical Company (“Uniroyal”) (collectively “Defendants”) have each presented proposed constructions of the term “al-koxy,” as we applied the term to Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 4,697,044 (“the ’044…

2Cases cited31 opinions

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995

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

3Cited by1 opinion

Abraxis Bioscience, Inc. v. NAVINTA, LLCDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2009