Legal Opinion
Marvin I. May v. American Southwest Waterbed Distributors, Inc., a Texas Corporation and Frank Lucas, an Individual
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided September 26, 1983No. 82-1302PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Per curiam
Having read the record, the briefs of the parties, and after hearing oral argument, we are convinced that the court below was correct in deciding that the device in the patent in question was not patentable because of obviousness as a matter of law. Therefore, the court below is affirmed on the basis of its opinion dated the 13th day of May 1982, attached hereto as Appendix “A”.
AFFIRMED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
MARVIN I. MAY, Plaintiff V. AMERICAN SOUTHWEST WATERBED DISTRIBUTORS, INC., and FRANK LUCAS, Defendants
CIVIL ACTION NO.…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- The Boeing Company v. Daniel C. ShipmanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Lear, Inc. v. AdkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Smith v. SnowSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Control Components, Inc., and Richard E. Self v. Valtek, Inc. And Alpha Engineering CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Railroad Dynamics, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee v. A. Stucki Company, Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Marvin I. May v. American Southwest Waterbed Distributors, Inc., a Texas Corporation and Frank Lucas, an IndividualCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- May v. American Southwest Waterbed Distributors, IncCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- Railroad Dynamics, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee v. A. Stucki Company, Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984