A. W. SCHNITGER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
CANOGA ELECTRONICS CORP., DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a prior judgment finding a patent valid is res judicata as to a party in privity with the infringer, barring a subsequent declaratory judgment action challenging the patent's validity.
Schnitger sought a declaratory judgment that a patent held valid against Tryon was invalid, so he could purchase infringing products from Tryon. Tryon…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Privity cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Schnitger appeals from a district court order dismissing his complaint for declaratory relief against Canoga Electronics Corporation. We affirm.
Canoga’s subsidiary, Scanbe Manufacturing Corporation, produces electrical circuit board files pursuant to Patent Re. 25,595. Scanbe obtained a judicial decision in 1966 that the patent was valid and that William Tryon, d/b./a Tryon Components Company, was infringing it by making and selling printed circuit card holders and card holder assemblies. The court enjoined Tryon from future infringement.
Schnitger wants to purchase the circuit board files from Tryon, which cannot sell to him because of the 1966 injunction. Hence Schnitger brought this declaratory judgment action seeking a judicial ruling that the Scanbe patent is invalid and that Tryon can sell it despite the 1966 judgment.
Although the district court did not specify the reasons for its dismissal, it appears from the record that Schnitger is in privity with Tryon. The 1966 judgment is res judicata as to Tryon and those who obtain the infringing product from him. Ransburg Electro-Coating Corp. v. Williams, 246 F.Supp. 626 (W.D.Ark.1965). That judgment provides a complete defense to Schnit-ger’s declaratory judgment action, and the district court properly dismissed it.
The order of the district court is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Schlegel Mfg. Co. v. USM Corp., 525 F.2d 775 (6th Cir. 1975)
-
Broadview Chem. Corp. v. Loctite Corp., 474 F.2d 1391 (2d Cir. 1973)
-
TRW, Inc. v. Ellipse Corp. & Ford Motor Co., 495 F.2d 314 (7th Cir. 1974)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence