49 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 236,991 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 216,978 times 40 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"
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
475 U.S. 574 (1986) Cited 113,466 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them
Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc.
517 U.S. 370 (1996) Cited 5,366 times 65 Legal Analyses
Holding that claim construction is a matter of law for the court
Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical
520 U.S. 17 (1997) Cited 1,700 times 32 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[t]he determination of equivalence should be applied as an objective inquiry on an element-by-element basis"
Phillips v. AWH Corp.
415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) Cited 5,729 times 164 Legal Analyses
Holding that "because extrinsic evidence can help educate the court regarding the field of the invention and can help the court determine what a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand claim terms to mean, it is permissible for the district court in its sound discretion to admit and use such evidence"
Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyokabushiki Co.
535 U.S. 722 (2002) Cited 813 times 37 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[t]he scope of a patent is not limited to its literal terms but instead embraces all equivalents to the claims described," because "[t]he language in the patent claims may not capture every nuance of the invention or describe with complete precision the range of its novelty."
Blonder-Tongue v. University Foundation
402 U.S. 313 (1971) Cited 2,224 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding issue preclusion inappropriate when "without fault of his own the [party to be precluded] was deprived of crucial evidence or witnesses in the first litigation"
Soremekun v. Thrifty Payless
509 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 2,268 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that speculative testimony is insufficient to defeat summary judgment
Arpin v. Santa Clara Valley Transp. Agency
261 F.3d 912 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 1,790 times
Holding that "conclusory allegations unsupported by factual data are insufficient to defeat summary judgment motion"
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 329,861 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 112 - Specification
35 U.S.C. § 112 Cited 7,287 times 1030 Legal Analyses
Requiring patent applications to include a "specification" that provides, among other information, a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it
Section 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty
35 U.S.C. § 102 Cited 5,944 times 960 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"
Section 120 - Benefit of earlier filing date in the United States
35 U.S.C. § 120 Cited 593 times 109 Legal Analyses
Granting an earlier priority date to later applications for inventions that were disclosed in a previous application

Adrian Rivera v. Remington Designs, Llc

49 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

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"

Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

Holding that claim construction is a matter of law for the court

Holding that "[t]he determination of equivalence should be applied as an objective inquiry on an element-by-element basis"

Holding that "[t]he scope of a patent is not limited to its literal terms but instead embraces all equivalents to the claims described," because "[t]he language in the patent claims may not capture every nuance of the invention or describe with complete precision the range of its novelty."

Holding issue preclusion inappropriate when "without fault of his own the [party to be precluded] was deprived of crucial evidence or witnesses in the first litigation"

Holding that speculative testimony is insufficient to defeat summary judgment

Holding that "conclusory allegations unsupported by factual data are insufficient to defeat summary judgment motion"

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

Requiring patent applications to include a "specification" that provides, among other information, a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it

Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"

Granting an earlier priority date to later applications for inventions that were disclosed in a previous application