Legal Opinion
ArcelorMittal France v. AK Steel Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided December 4, 2015No. Civ. No. 10-050-SLR, Civ. No. 13-685-SLRPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM.
Sue L. Robinson, United States District Judge
At Wilmington this 4th day of December, 2015, having reviewed the pending motions1 filed by the. parties2 in both of the above captioned casps, and having heard, oral argument on the same, I will grant defendants’ motions for summary judgment and deny plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss in Civ. No. 10-050, and will grant plaintiffs’ motion to amend in Civ. No. 13-685, consistent with the following reasoning.
i 1. Background.3 The above captioned litigation has a convoluted procedural history. Plaintiffs asserted U.S. Patent No. 6,296,805 (“the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Interconnect Planning Corporation v. Thomas E. Feil, Robert O. Carpenter, v Band Systems, Inc., and Turret Equipment Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- Arcelormittal France v. Ak Steel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
- Arcelormittal France v. Ak Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2015
- Scripps Clinic and Research Foundation v. Genentech, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1988
3Cited by3 opinions
- Arcelormittal v. Ak Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Arcelormittal v. Ak Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Arcelormittal v. Ak Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017