1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 21 F.3d
  5. 21 F.3d 1068 (1994)
 

HEIDELBERGER DRUCKMASCHINEN v. HANTSCHO COMMERCIAL

Nos. 93-1357, 93-1358.

21 F.3d 1068 (1994)

HEIDELBERGER DRUCKMASCHINEN AG, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. HANTSCHO COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS, INC. and Rockwell Graphics Systems, Inc., Defendants/Cross-Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Rehearing Denied; Suggestion for Rehearing Declined June 1, 1994.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

David H.T. Kane, Atty., Kane, Dalsimer, Sullivan, Kurucz, Levy, Eisele and Richard, New York City, argued for plaintiff/appellant. Also on the brief was Lerner & Greenberg, P.A., of Hollywood, FL.

David A. Tamburro, Atty., Nies, Kurz, Bergert & Tamburro, Arlington, VA, argued for defendants/cross appellants. Also on the brief was John D. Nies.

Before NEWMAN, LOURIE, and SCHALL, Circuit Judges.

Rehearing Denied; Suggestion for Rehearing In Banc Declined June 1, 1994 in No. 93-1357.

PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.

Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG appeals from the decision of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York,1 holding United States Patent No. 4,509,939 (the '939 patent) invalid for obviousness. Hantscho Commercial Products and Rockwell Graphics Systems cross-appeal from the district court...

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