PIETRUNTI

v.

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF BRICK TOWNSHIP

Citator

Cited By (19 total)

• DeLONG Corp. v. Raymond Int'l, Inc., 622 F.2d 1135 (3d Cir. 1980)
  …ntly tested the prototype to prove its utility and to determine that no further refinements are necessary.” In Re Yarn Processing Patent Validity Litigation, 498 F. 2d 271, 279 (5th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., Sauquoit Fibers Co. v. Leesona Corp., 419 U.S. 1057, 95 S.Ct. 640, 42 L.Ed.2d 654 (1974). Considerable confusion exists in the cases as to when an invention has been reduced to practice. It is a legal term of art and the apparent conflict has been ascribed to the differing definitions of the term. Se…
• Studiengesellschaft Kohle mbH for the Max-Planck-Institut fur Kohlenforschung v. Eastman Kodak Co., 616 F.2d 1315 (5th Cir. 1980)
  …ed neither a judicial determination nor a stipulation of the parties with respect to the validity of [the patent] or its infringement.” 575 F. 2d at 539-540. In In re Yarn Processing Patent Validity Litigation, 498 F. 2d 271 (5th Cir.) cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1057, 95 S.Ct. 640, 42 L.Ed.2d 654 (1974), we pointed out that in order to invoke estoppel, the issues must be the same as those previously decided. Because we found that the date of invention and the date of reduction to practice were separate issues, o…
• Timely Prods. Corp. v. Arron, 523 F.2d 288 (2d Cir. 1975)
  …mic Energy Commission, 451 F. 2d 849, 859 (5th Cir. 1971). (3) Finally, the sale must be primarily for profit rather than for experimental purposes. In re Yarn Processing Patent Validity Litigation, 498 F. 2d 271, 277 (5th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1057, 95 S.Ct. 640, 42 L.Ed.2d 654 (1975). See also Dart Industries, Inc. v. E. I. duPont de Nemours & Co., supra, 489 F. 2d at 1366. The Alexander Sales Transaction satisfies all three of these requirements. There can be no serious question that, at t…