§Why CasetextPricing

Paice LLP v. Toyota Motors Corp et al

MOTION for Permanent Injunction

16 Cited authorities

  1. Hybritech Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories

    849 F.2d 1446 (Fed. Cir. 1988)   Cited 367 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the grant of a preliminary injunction was based on more than an unwarranted presumption of irreparable harm where the district court found the patentee would suffer lost market position and obstructed business relationships in the market

  2. Reebok Intern. Ltd. v. J. Baker, Inc.

    32 F.3d 1552 (Fed. Cir. 1994)   Cited 227 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when a movant establishes a strong likelihood of success on the merits, there is a presumption of irreparable harm

  3. Windsurfing International, Inc. v. AMF, Inc.

    782 F.2d 995 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 232 times   2 Legal Analyses

    Appeal Nos. 85-2808, 85-2809, 85-2835, 85-2836, 86-514 and 86-548. January 28, 1986. David H. Badger, Willian, Brinks, Olds, Hofer, Gilson Lione, Indianapolis, Ind., argued for appellant AMF, Inc. Thomas F. Reddy, Jr., Pennie Edmonds, of New York City, argued for appellant/cross-appellee BIC Leisure Products, Inc. With him on the brief were Joseph V. Colaianni, Pennie Edmonds, Washington, D.C., and Brian M. Poissant, Pennie Edmonds, New York City. Harold E. Wurst, Nilsson, Robbins, Dalgarn, Berliner

  4. Richardson v. Suzuki Motor Co., LTD

    868 F.2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1989)   Cited 181 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Finding an equitable remedy appropriate for wrongful appropriation of intellectual property

  5. Smith Intern., Inc. v. Hughes Tool Co.

    718 F.2d 1573 (Fed. Cir. 1983)   Cited 187 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding "where validity and continuing infringement have been clearly established . . . immediate irreparable harm is presumed"

  6. H.H. Robertson, Co. v. United Steel Deck

    820 F.2d 384 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 159 times
    Holding that at preliminary injunction stage burden of establishing invalidity remains on challenger

  7. W.L. Gore Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc.

    842 F.2d 1275 (Fed. Cir. 1988)   Cited 142 times
    Holding that, when applicable, the plain language of § 1498 shields contractors, subcontractors, and sub-subcontractors from liability

  8. MercExchange, L.L.C. v. eBay, Inc.

    401 F.3d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2005)   Cited 67 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Describing the lower standard for preliminary injunctions in patent cases as a general rule

  9. Atlas Powder Co. v. Ireco Chemicals

    773 F.2d 1230 (Fed. Cir. 1985)   Cited 114 times
    Holding that monetary relief does not necessarily compensate patentees for future infringement

  10. KSM Fastening Systems, Inc. v. H.A. Jones Co.

    776 F.2d 1522 (Fed. Cir. 1985)   Cited 112 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "contempt proceedings . . . are available only with respect to devices previously admitted or adjudged to infringe, and to other devices which are no more than colorably different therefrom and which clearly are infringements of the patent"

  11. Section 283 - Injunction

    35 U.S.C. § 283   Cited 801 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Providing for injunctive relief, treble damages, and—in “exceptional cases”—attorney’s fees as remedies for patent infringement