Calavo Growers, Inc. v. Luis Calvo Sanz, S.A.

8 Cited authorities

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 220,711 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
Lawlor v. Nat'l Screen Serv.
349 U.S. 322 (1955) Cited 889 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that two suits were not "based on the same cause of action," because "[t]he conduct presently complained of was all subsequent to" the prior judgment and it "cannot be given the effect of extinguishing claims which did not even then exist and which could not possibly have been sued upon in the previous case"
Jet, Inc. v. Sewage Aeration Systems
223 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2000) Cited 79 times 2 Legal Analyses
Concluding that the same cause of action can exist in two cases only where the same set of transactional facts are involved in those cases and that, where the transactional facts differ, the doctrine of claim preclusion does not apply
International Nutrition Co. v. Horphag Research, Ltd.
220 F.3d 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2000) Cited 23 times
Stating that the term privity "is simply a shorthand way of saying that nonparty [i.e. , a party not named in a prior action] will be bound by the judgment in that action"
Opryland USA v. Great American Music Show
970 F.2d 847 (Fed. Cir. 1992) Cited 24 times
In Opryland, Opryland USA opposed the registration of "THE CAROLINA OPRY," arguing that the term was confusingly similar to Opryland's own marks.
Chromalloy American Corp. v. Kenneth Gordon
736 F.2d 694 (Fed. Cir. 1984) Cited 10 times
Holding that infringement litigation between different marks did not claim preclude later petition in opposition to registration
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 336,292 times 161 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Rule 55 - Default; Default Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 55 Cited 34,986 times 13 Legal Analyses
Adopting similar language for acquiring default judgment against the United States

Calavo Growers, Inc. v. Luis Calvo Sanz, S.A.

8 Cited authorities

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Concluding that the same cause of action can exist in two cases only where the same set of transactional facts are involved in those cases and that, where the transactional facts differ, the doctrine of claim preclusion does not apply

Stating that the term privity "is simply a shorthand way of saying that nonparty [i.e. , a party not named in a prior action] will be bound by the judgment in that action"

In Opryland, Opryland USA opposed the registration of "THE CAROLINA OPRY," arguing that the term was confusingly similar to Opryland's own marks.

Holding that infringement litigation between different marks did not claim preclude later petition in opposition to registration

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Adopting similar language for acquiring default judgment against the United States