JOY MM DELAWARE, INC. et al v. CINCINNATI MINE MACHINERY, CO
| JOY MM DELAWARE, INC. and JOY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. |
| CINCINNATI MINE MACHINERY, CO |
| 2:2009cv01415 |
| October 22, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Pittsburgh Office |
| Allegheny |
| Gary L. Lancaster |
| Plaintiff |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 145 Patent Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
103
ORDER granting 102 Joint Motion for Stipulation of Dismissal. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster on 12/21/12. (map)
|
|
Filing
88
ORDER granting 86 Joint Motion for Entry of Final Judgment and entering FINAL JUDGMENT, in accordance with the Court's Memorandum and Order of 12/5/2011, that Cincinnati Mine Machinery's DA-350 product does not infringe Claim 2 of U.S. Pa tent No. 6,662,932 (the '932 patent), Claim 2 of the '932 patent is invalid due to a violation of the best mode requirement, the '932 patent is not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct and Claim 2 of the '932 patent is not invalid as anticipated; All remaining claims, counterclaims, and defenses are dismissed, without prejudice; Clerk of Court shall mark the instant CASE CLOSED. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster on 1/4/12. (map)
|
|
Filing
83
MEMORANDUM and ORDER granting in part 59 Motion for Summary Judgment in that, as a matter of law, Claim 2 of the '932 Patent is invalid due to a violation of the best mode requirement, and defendant's DA-350 conveyor chain and flight asse mbly does not infringe Claim 2 of the '932 Patent; 59 Motion for Summary Judgment is denied in part, with prejudice and as a matter of law, in that the Russell '867 does not anticipate Claim 2 of the '932 Patent, and denying, withou t prejudice, the ability of plaintiff to collect enhanced damages; 54 Motion for Summary Judgment is granted on the issue of inequitable conduct; 51 Motion for Summary Judgment is granted in part, on the issue of invalidity due to anticipation, but denied in part as to the best mode requirement. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster on 12/5/11. (map)
|
|
Filing
81
ORDER granting 80 Joint MOTION to Seal Pretrial Narrative Reports; Parties may file their expert reports and accompanying exhibits, submitted with their Pretrial Narratives, under seal; Deadline to file plaintiff's pretrial statement is extended to 12/1/2011; Defendant's pretrial statement is now due 12/22/2011. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster on 11/10/11. (map)
|
|
Filing
29
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION regarding claim construction. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster on 10/8/10. (map)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
