Airframe Systems, Inc. v. Raytheon Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a software development company whose original action had alleged infringement of its copyright through defendants' possession of its source code was barred from bringing a later action that alleged copyright infringement based on the use of its source code
• holding that the plaintiffs earlier claims of infringement by possession and its later claims of infringement by use of its source code arose from the same nucleus of operative facts and, therefore, the later claims were barred by res judicata
• explaining that claim preclusion under Massachusetts law operates the same way as claim preclusion under federal law
• recognizing this standard as the primary focus in determining whether nonmutual claim preclusion is appropriate
• noting that the doctrine bars “not just claims that were actually made”
• explaining claim preclusion “bars parties from relitigating claims that could have been made in an earlier suit, not just claims that were actually made”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).