· 5/31/1985
Aetna-Standard Engineering Co. v. Rowland
Citations
- 493 A.2d 1375
- 343 Pa. Super. 64
- 228 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 292
- 1985 Pa. Super. LEXIS 7860
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that while employer has no right to employee’s patent interest, under shop right employer was entitled to the royalty-free, non-exclusive use of the invention
- “[S]tate court has jurisdiction to consider the issue of patent validity as a defense to the action [to recover patent royalties].”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Cirillo, Tamilia, Montgomery
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.