Legal Opinion

Richard E. Self v. Fisher Controls Company, Inc., and Control Specialists, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 19, 1977No. 75-2356PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiff appeals from the dismissal of this patent infringement action, as to both defendants, by the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Court granted the motion of Fisher Controls Company, Inc. (hereinafter, “Fisher”) to dismiss the complaint for lack of venue, and the motion of Control Specialists, Inc., (hereinafter, “CSI”) for summary judgment. We affirm the dismissal as to Fisher, but reverse the summary judgment in favor of CSI.

A patent infringement action against a corporate defendant, such as Fisher, may be brought in a judicial district (a)…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Honeywell, Inc. v. Metz ApparatewerkeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1975
  2. Stearns v. Tinker & RasorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
  3. Miles Laboratories, Inc. v. FrolichDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1961
  4. Endrezze v. Dorr Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
  5. Stamicarbon, N.V. v. McNally-Pittsburg Manufacturing Corp.District Court, D. Kansas · 1969

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. New Hampshire Insurance v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co.District Court, N.D. California · 1994
  2. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE CTY.California Court of Appeal · 1993
  3. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Star Technologies, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 1996
  4. Procter & Gamble Co. v. Nabisco Brands, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1985
  5. Joslyn Manufacturing Co. v. Amerace Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1990

8 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