Legal Opinion

Sparton Corp. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided August 4, 2003No. 92-580CPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DAMICH, Chief Judge.

On October 3,1997, Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Invalidity, wherein Defendant asserted that Plaintiff, Sparton Corporation (“Sparton”), could not recover under 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a) because Sparton’s patents numbered 3,921,-120 (“the T20 patent”) and 4,029,233 (“the ’233 patent”) are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). In opposition, Sparton contends that experimental use negates the statutory bar of section 102(b). Moreover, Spar-ton claims that the patented inventions were not offered for sale prior to the critical date. Two oral…

2Cases cited43 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. Barmag Barmer Maschinenfabrik Ag v. Murata MacHinery Ltd., and Murata of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
  4. Vivid Technologies, Inc. v. American Science & Engineering, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
  5. Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Sparton Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API