1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 785 F.2d
  5. 785 F.2d 292 (1986)
 

LAITRAM CORP. v. CAMBRIDGE WIRE CLOTH CO.

Appeal Nos. 85-2247, 85-2248.

785 F.2d 292 (1986)

The LAITRAM CORPORATION and Intralox, Inc., Appellees/Cross-Appellants, v. CAMBRIDGE WIRE CLOTH COMPANY, Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 3, 1986.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Kevin E. Joyce, Cushman, Darby & Cushman, Washington, D.C., argued, for appellant. With him on brief was David W. Brinkman.

Paul J. Hayes, Weingarten, Schurgin, Gagnelin & Hayes, Boston, Mass., argued, for appellees. With him on brief was Victor B. Lebovici.

Before BALDWIN, Circuit Judge, NICHOLS, Senior Circuit Judge, and BISSELL, Circuit Judge.

BISSELL, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, finding U.S. Patent Nos. 4,159,763 ('763), 3,870,141 ('141), 4,051,949 ('949) and Re. 30,341 ('341) owned by Laitram Corporation and Intralox, Inc. (collectively called Laitram) valid and infringed by products produced by Cambridge Wire Cloth Company (CWC). The magistrate's opinion is reported at 226 USPQ 289 (D.Md.1985). We affirm in part...

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