1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 576 F.2d
  5. 576 F.2d 400 (1978)
 

THYSSEN PLASTIK ANGER KG v. INDUPLAS, INC.

No. 77-1394.

576 F.2d 400 (1978)

THYSSEN PLASTIK ANGER KG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. INDUPLAS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

Decided May 30, 1978.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Daniel H. Kane, New York City, with whom Charles P. Bauer, New York City, Gerald Levy, Parsippany, N. Y., and Kane, Dalsimer, Kane, Sullivan & Kurucz, New York City, were on brief, for plaintiff-appellant.

David S. Abrams, Washington, D. C., with whom Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Kaul, Washington, D. C., Cesar A. Hernandez-Colon, Ponce, P. R., Donald A. Kaul and Alfred N. Goodman, Washington, D. C., were on brief, for defendant-appellee.

Before CAMPBELL, BOWNES and MOORE, Circuit Judges.

BOWNES, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from a summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee invalidating a patent held by plaintiff-appellant on the grounds that the "best mode" requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112 was violated.

The critical sentence for a court reviewing a grant of summary judgment is Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c):

The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases