Legal Opinion

Heinemann v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided April 16, 1980No. 202-79CPublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, Judge

*482This case involving a patented invention is before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Three causes of action are set forth in plaintiffs petition: patent infringement (count I); damages caused by reason of a secrecy order imposed with respect to the application for a patent for the invention and by reason of defendant’s alleged use of the patented invention (count II); and a taking under the fifth amendment (count III). In determining whether to grant defendant’s motion, we have…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Eastport Steamship Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
  2. Jacobs v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  3. Pauley Petroleum Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1979
  4. Bourgeois v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1976
  5. Sioux Tribe of Indians of the Lower Brule Reservation, South Dakota v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Robert W. Heinemann v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
  2. Dow Chemical Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1994
  3. Heinemann v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
  4. De Graffenried v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1983
  5. Demodulation, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014

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

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

Powered by the Exa API