JOY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. FLAKT, INC.

Civ. A. No. 89-533-JJF.

901 F.Supp. 180 (1995)

JOY TECHNOLOGIES, INC., A/S Niro Atomizer, Plaintiffs, v. FLAKT, INC., Defendant.

United States District Court, D. Delaware.

October 2, 1995.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Collins J. Seitz, Jr., of Connolly Bove Lodge & Hutz, Wilmington, Delaware. Robert A. Schroeder, Edward G. Poplawski, and Paul D. Tripodi, of Pretty, Schroeder, Brueggemann & Clark, Los Angeles, California. Attorneys for Plaintiff Joy Technologies, Inc.

James C. Doub, Daniel R. Lanier, of Miles & Stockbridge. Attorneys for Plaintiff A/S NIRO Atomizer.

Allen M. Terrell, Jr., and Frederick L. Cottrell, III, of Richards Layton & Finger, Wilmington, Delaware. Ronald J. St. Onge, William J. Speranza, and Stephen P. McNamara, of St. Onge Steward Johnston & Reens, Stamford, Connecticut. Attorneys for Defendant Flakt, Inc.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

FARNAN, District Judge.

This is an action for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 4,279,873 ("the '873 patent") commenced on September 28, 1989. On January 24, 1992 the Court entered judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs ("Joy" and "NIRO") based on a jury verdict that the '873 patent was valid and had been infringed. The Defendant ("Flakt") appealed, and the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment. The Federal Circuit is currently considering...

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