Legal Opinion

Rosemount, Inc. v. United States International Trade Commission, and Smar Equipment and Smar International Corporation, Intervenors-Appellees

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Decided August 2, 1990No. 90-1263PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NIES, Chief Judge.

I

Rosemount, Inc., appeals from the United States International Trade Commission’s order, In the Matter of Certain Pressure Transmitters, Inv. No. 337-TA-304 (March 19, 1990), denying Rosemount’s motion for temporary relief in a proceeding under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (codified as amended at 19 U.S.C. § 1337). Rose-mount is seeking relief during the penden-cy of the investigation (termed “temporary relief” in ITC practice) into its complaint alleging infringement of claims 1-4 of its U.S. Patent No. 3,800,413 (’413 patent). The alleged violation involves the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

University of Texas v. CamenischSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
Maggio v. ZeitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
Panduit Corp. v. All States Plastic Manufacturing Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
Heat & Control, Inc. v. Hester Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
Smith International, Inc., a California Corporation v. Hughes Tool Company, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983

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

3Cited by23 opinions

Reebok International Ltd. v. J. Baker, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
Abbott Laboratories v. Sandoz, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
Polymer Technologies, Inc., and Walter Polovina v. Andrew P. Bridwell, H.A. Spec. Co., and Westmark Ag Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Boehringer Ingelheim GmbHCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Boehringer Ingelheim GmbhCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001

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