Dr. David D. Stark v. Advanced Magnetics, Inc., and Jerome Goldstein, Ernest v. Groman and Lee Josephson

How courts have described this case

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

• finding § 1367 requirements met where “there is a substantial federal claim; the federal and state claims derive from common operative facts; and the plaintiff would normally expect to try all of the claims in a single proceeding”
• summary judgment that claim for correction of patent barred due to lack of diligence reversed
• where claim was silent on the meaning of one of its terms, the court looked to the prosecution history
• substantial equivalence under Graver Tank requires a “showing of substantial identity of function, way, and result,” and whether the “way” or “result” prong is met “is highly dependent on how broadly one defines the ‘function’ ” element

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).