Amana Refrigeration, Inc. v. Quadlux, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding there was no actual controversy in a declaratory judgment action when the patentee had filed a covenant not to sue over a patent
• rejecting argument that a reasonable apprehension of suit existed as to “new products ‘in the pipeline,’ ” stating that “an actual controversy cannot be based on a fear of litigation over future products”
• rejecting argument that covenant subjected declaratory judgment plaintiff to risk of further litigation because of the potential grant of a reissue patent and stating “the future existence of a reissue patent is wholly speculative and, therefore, cannot create a present controversy”
• “an actual controversy cannot be based on a fear of litigation over future products”
• “[A] covenant not to sue for any infringing acts involving products ‘made, sold, or used’ on or before the filing date [of a complaint] is sufficient to divest a trial court of jurisdiction over a declaratory judgment action.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).