Fiskars, Inc. And Fiskars Oy Ab v. Hunt Manufacturing Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding Rule 60(b)(6) did not apply, in part, because the alleged infringer could have put on its best available evidence of noninfringing alternatives but “apparently chose not to do so”
• “[T]he issue before us—whether a lost profits damages award should be set aside [under Rule 60(b
• “Rule 60(b)(6) is available only in extraordinary circumstances and only when the basis for relief does not fall within any of the other subsections of Rule 60(b).”
• “Rule 60(b)(6) is available only in extraordinary circumstances and only when the basis for relief does not fall within any of the other subsections of Rule 60(b).”
• “Rule 60(b)(6) is available only in extraordinary circumstances and only when the basis for relief does not fall within any of the other subsections of Rule 60(b).”
• “Rule 60(b)(6) is available only in extraordinary circumstances and only when the basis for relief does not fall within any of the other subsections of Rule 60(b).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).