Thomson S.A. v. Quixote Corp. Thomson S.A. v. Quixote Corp.

Thomson S.A. v. Quixote Corp‪.‬

166 F.3d 1172, 49 U.S.P.Q.2d 1530, CFC.42037(1999)

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

Appealed from: United States District Court for the District of Delaware Chief Judge Joseph J. Longobardi Thomson, S.A. (""Thomson"") appeals from the June 24, 1997 order of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in an action for patent infringement. See Thomson, S.A. v. Quixote Corp., 979 F. Supp. 286 (D. Del. 1997) (""Thomson I""). The court denied Thomson's motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law or in the alternative for a new trial, and sustained the jury verdict that U.S. Patent Nos. 4,868,808, 5,182,743, 4,196,186, and 4,175,725 are invalid for lack of novelty under 35 U.S.C. § 102(g). We affirm. Background Plaintiff-Appellant Thomson is the assignee of the patents in suit, which are directed to optical information-storage devices, such as compact discs (""CDs""). Thomson makes and markets machines that ""read"" or ""play"" CDs, and grants licenses under the patents in suit to companies which produce CDs. Defendants-Appellees, Quixote Corp. and Disc Manufacturing, Inc. (collectively, ""Quixote"") make CDs. 1

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1999
25 January
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
10
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
60.3
KB

More Books by Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals

[U] Looper v. Department of Defense [U] Looper v. Department of Defense
1994
[U] Lockhart v. Office of Personnel Management [U] Lockhart v. Office of Personnel Management
1995
[U] Dickerson v. Office of Personnel Management [U] Dickerson v. Office of Personnel Management
1995
[U] Elinzano v. Merit Systems Protection Bd. [U] Elinzano v. Merit Systems Protection Bd.
1995
[U] Grannum v. Department of Justice [U] Grannum v. Department of Justice
1995
[U] Dalton v. Murdock Mach. & Engineering Co. of Utah [U] Dalton v. Murdock Mach. & Engineering Co. of Utah
1995