Legal Opinion
D.G. Rung Industries, Inc. v. Tinnerman
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided January 17, 1986No. C85-881DPublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
DIMMICK, District Judge.
Defendant Ed Tinnerman has moved for dismissal of patent infringement and related state claims brought by D.G. Rung Industries, Inc. and Darrell G. Rung (“Rung”). The Court heard oral argument and has considered the memoranda, affidavits and exhibits filed by counsel. 1 The Court concludes that plaintiff’s claim of infringement is not properly before the Court, and therefore dismisses plaintiffs’ cause of action.
Rung' brings this action under 35 U.S.C. § 271 for patent infringement. In addition, Rung asserts a number of state claims: breach of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Societe De Conditionnement en Aluminium v. Hunter Engineering Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Super Products Corporation, a Wisconsin Corporation v. D P Way Corporation, a Wisconsin CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
- Chemical Engineering Corp., and John O. McLean v. Marlo, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- C. Martin Welch v. Eugene L. GrindleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Lang v. Pacific Marine and Supply Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Lang v. Pacific Marine & Supply Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- The Laitram Corporation & Intralox, Inc. v. The Cambridge Wire Cloth CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Lang v. Pacific Marine and Supply Co., Inc.District Court, D. Hawaii · 1989
- Walsh v. Microsoft Corp.District Court, W.D. Washington · 2014
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.