HOME Popular Books Popular Audioooks Popular Textbooks Popular Freebooks More Genres

Book

Audiobook

Genres

Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. United States

By United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Release : 1988-08-30

Genre : Law, Books, Professional & Technical

Kind : ebook

(0 ratings)
Newell Companies, Inc., appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island, 606 F. Supp. 1282, 226 USPQ 157 (D.R.I. 1985) (Boyle, C.J.), in a patent infringement suit brought against Kenney Manufacturing Company. Following a jury trial in which the jury answered interrogatories responding, inter alia, that no claims in issue of United States Patent No. 4,006,770 (the 770 patent), owned by Newell, were proved invalid for obviousness under the standard of 35 U.S.C. § 103 (1982), the district court granted Kenneys reserved motion for directed verdict and entered judgment for Kenney on that issue holding claims 1, 2, 6 and 7 invalid. We affirm.

Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. United States

By United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Release : 1988-08-30

Genre : Law, Books, Professional & Technical

Kind : ebook

(0 ratings)
Newell Companies, Inc., appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island, 606 F. Supp. 1282, 226 USPQ 157 (D.R.I. 1985) (Boyle, C.J.), in a patent infringement suit brought against Kenney Manufacturing Company. Following a jury trial in which the jury answered interrogatories responding, inter alia, that no claims in issue of United States Patent No. 4,006,770 (the 770 patent), owned by Newell, were proved invalid for obviousness under the standard of 35 U.S.C. § 103 (1982), the district court granted Kenneys reserved motion for directed verdict and entered judgment for Kenney on that issue holding claims 1, 2, 6 and 7 invalid. We affirm.

advertisement

Access e-books

More By United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Bott v. Four Star Corp.

Bott v. Four Star Corp.

Borsellino v. Goldman Sachs Group

Hart v. Fedex Ground Package System Inc.

Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. United States

High Tech Medical Instrumentation, Inc. v. New Image Industries, Inc.

Faas v. Sears

L.A. Gear Inc. v. Tom Mcan Shoe Co.

Jurgens v. Mckasy

Perkin-Elmer Corp. v. Computervision Corp.

Default Proof Credit Card System, Inc. v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.

Jackson Jordan Inc. v. Plasser American Corp.

Bales v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

Electro Medical Systems

Stratoflex Inc. V. Aeroquip Corp.

Seattle Box Co. v. Industrial Crating & Packing Inc.

Globetrotter Software, Inc. v. Christiano

Glaverbel Societe Anonyme v. Northlake Marketing & Supply

Raymond v. Ameritech Corp.

Kafo v. United States

Carroll v. Department of Health and Human Services

Emerald Maintenance Inc. v. United States

Bigham v. Godtfredsen

United States v. Boston

Ralston Purina Co. v. Far-Mar-Co. Inc.

Shaw v. United States Postal Service

Beachcombers v. Wildewood Creative Products

United States v. Tahzib

United States v. Demaree

Chin v. United States

Texas Instruments Inc. v. United States International Trade Commission

Winters v. Fru-Con Inc.

Hines v. Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services

United States v. Zastrow

Johnson v. Snyder

Ridge Line, Inc. v. United States

Wilson Sporting Goods Co. v. Hillerich & Bradsby Co.

Stewart v. Astrue

Modine Manufacturing Co. v. Allen Group Inc.

Desarno v. Department of Commerce

Joseph v. Holder

Escobar v. office of Personnel Management

United States v. Simmons

Collins v. Merit Systems Protection Board

Mcentee v. Merit Systems Protection Board

Eskridge v. Cook County

Air Products And Chemicals Inc. v. Chas. S. Tanner Co.

Khrystotodorov v. Mukasey

Todd v. United States

American Medical Systems Inc. v. Medical Engineering Corp.