56 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 236,142 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 216,254 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 113,092 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
Adickes v. Kress Co.
398 U.S. 144 (1970) Cited 25,038 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a private person who conspires with government actors to deprive a plaintiff of her constitutional rights acts "under color of law" for purposes of § 1983
Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc.
517 U.S. 370 (1996) Cited 5,357 times 64 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 1,696 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 5,714 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"
Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc.
52 F.3d 967 (Fed. Cir. 1995) Cited 5,127 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that inventor testimony as to "[t]he subjective intent of the inventor when he used a particular term is of little or no probative weight in determining the scope of a claim (except as documented in the prosecution history)."
Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.
90 F.3d 1576 (Fed. Cir. 1996) Cited 4,314 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim construction that excludes the preferred embodiment is "rarely, if ever, correct and would require highly persuasive evidentiary support"
Devereaux v. Abbey
263 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 2,346 times
Holding that questionable investigative techniques did not cause due process violations and noting that “[f]ailing to follow guidelines or to carry out an investigation in a manner that will ensure an error-free result is one thing; intentionally fabricating false evidence is quite another”
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,637 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden
15 U.S.C. § 1125 Cited 15,270 times 320 Legal Analyses
Holding "the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional"
Section 271 - Infringement of patent
35 U.S.C. § 271 Cited 6,039 times 1047 Legal Analyses
Holding that testing is a "use"
Section 1117 - Recovery for violation of rights
15 U.S.C. § 1117 Cited 4,884 times 144 Legal Analyses
Granting district courts significant discretion to award damages for a violation of § 1125

Soilworks LLC v Midwest Industrial Supply Inc

56 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 a private person who conspires with government actors to deprive a plaintiff of her constitutional rights acts "under color of law" for purposes of § 1983

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 inventor testimony as to "[t]he subjective intent of the inventor when he used a particular term is of little or no probative weight in determining the scope of a claim (except as documented in the prosecution history)."

Holding that a claim construction that excludes the preferred embodiment is "rarely, if ever, correct and would require highly persuasive evidentiary support"

Holding that questionable investigative techniques did not cause due process violations and noting that “[f]ailing to follow guidelines or to carry out an investigation in a manner that will ensure an error-free result is one thing; intentionally fabricating false evidence is quite another”

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

Holding "the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional"

Holding that testing is a "use"

Granting district courts significant discretion to award damages for a violation of § 1125