1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 543 F.Supp.
  5. 543 F.Supp. 522 (1982)
 

COSDEN OIL & CHEMICAL CO. v. AMERICAN HOECHST CORP.

Civ. A. No. 76-37.

543 F.Supp. 522 (1982)

COSDEN OIL & CHEMICAL COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN HOECHST CORPORATION, Defendant.

United States District Court, D. Delaware.

Supplemental Opinion June 23, 1982.

As Modified June 23, 1982.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Douglas E. Whitney, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, Wilmington, Del., William D. Harris, Jr., Garland P. Andrews, Jerry R. Selinger, Richards, Harris & Medlock, Dallas, Tex., M. N. Cheairs, Monty L. Ross, Dallas, Tex., Joe A. Moss, American Petrofina, Inc., Dallas, Tex., for plaintiff.

E. Norman Veasey, Robert H. Richards, III, Jesse A. Finkelstein, Richards, Layton & Finger, Wilmington, Del., Francis J. Hone, Edward V. Filardi, Brumbaugh, Graves, Donohue & Raymond, New York City, John C. Wyman, Roche, Carens & DiGiacomo, Boston, Mass., for defendant.

OPINION

STAPLETON, District Judge.

These are consolidated actions involving the validity, infringement, ity of United States Patents No. 3,868,434 ("'434 patent") and No. 3,996,311 ("'311 patent"), which issued to Richard C. Westphal ("Westphal") and Paul Heinig ("Heinig"). Cosden Oil and Chemical Company ("Cosden") originally filed this suit asking for a declaratory judgment that the patents in suit are invalid,

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