Legal Opinion

Invista North America S.Á.R.L. v. M & G USA Corp.

District Court, D. Delaware

Decided March 31, 2014No. Civ. No. 11-1007-SLR-CJBPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

ROBINSON, District Judge

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs INVISTA North America S.a.r.l. (“Invista”) and Auriga Polymers Inc.1 (“Auriga”) (collectively, “plaintiffs”) sued M & G USA Corporation and M & G Polymers USA, LLC (collectively, “defendants”) for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,919,159 (“the 159 patent), 7,943,216 (“the ’216 patent”), and 7,879,930 (“the ’930 patent”) (collectively, “the patents-in-suit”). (D.I. 1; D.I. 7) Defendants asserted counterclaims seeking declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of the patents-in-suit. (D.I.42)

In a memorandum…

2Cases cited55 opinions

  1. Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
  3. Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L. L. C.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
  4. Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  5. Allied Chemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. v. GameStop CorporationDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2024
  2. Western Plastics, Inc. v. DuBose Strapping, Inc.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API