Amsted Industries Incorporated, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Buckeye Steel Castings Company

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that as a matter of law that a letter notifying and generally warning a whole industry including defendant against infringement was not notice
• holding the communication must convey, “with sufficient specificity,” the patent holder’s belief “that the recipient of the notice may be an infringer”
• holding notice to whole industry through letter about possible patent infringement was not notice within the meaning of Section 287(a)
• holding plaintiffs letter notifying the whole industry of its patent ownership and warning competitors to cease infringement did not constitute notice under Section 287(a)
• holding merely informational letter to the industry insufficient to constitute notice under Section 287(a)
• finding courts “must focus on the action of the patentee, not the knowledge or understanding of the infringer”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).