1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 820 F.Supp.
  5. 820 F.Supp. 802 (1993)
 

JOY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. FLAKT, INC.

Civ. A. No. 89-533-JJF.

820 F.Supp. 802 (1993)

JOY TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, and A/S Niro Atomizer, Involuntary Plaintiff, v. FLAKT, INC., Defendant.

United States District Court, D. Delaware.

March 31, 1993.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Collins J. Seitz, Jr., of Connolly Bove Lodge & Hutz, Wilmington, DE, Robert A. Schroeder, Edward G. Poplawski, and Joseph T. Jakubek, of Pretty Schroeder Brueggemann & Clark, Los Angeles, CA, for plaintiff.

Allen M. Terrell, Jr., and Frederick L. Cottrell, III, of Richards Layton & Finger, Wilmington, DE, Paul Lempel, and Lynne Darcy, of Kenyon & Kenyon, New York City, for defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

FARNAN, District Judge.

Pending before the Court is Flakt, Inc.'s ("Flakt") Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b) and, in the alternative, Flakt's Motion for a New Trial pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59. Flakt contends that the jury verdict in this patent infringement action cannot be justified based on the evidence adduced at trial and, therefore, Flakt argues it is entitled to a judgment as a matter...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases