Legal Opinion
Honeywell International, Inc. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided November 17, 2005No. C.A.03-242-MPTPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THYNGE, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. Nature and Stage of the Proceedings
This action, which originated as a patent infringement case, involves technology in the aviation industry. On March 3, 2003, Honeywell International, Inc. 1 and Honeywell Intellectual Properties, Inc. 2 (collectively “Honeywell”) filed suit against Sandel Avionics, Inc. (“Sandel”) 3 alleging infringement of claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 4,914,436 (the “ ’436 patent”). 4 On March 24, 2003, Sandel filed its answer denying Honeywell’s allegations and its counterclaims alleging the ’436…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Precision Instrument Manufacturing Co. v. Automotive Maintenance MacHinery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- A.C. Aukerman Company v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
- Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Epcon Gas Systems, Inc. And Norman S. Loren v. Bauer Compressors, Inc., Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Handgards, Inc., a Corporation v. Ethicon, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Merus N.V.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Merus N.V.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017