General Universal Systems, Inc. v. Hal, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• interpreting Texas law in holding that “use” included using the plaintiffs product to “accelerate the development and marketability” of a defendant’s own product
• stating “the mandate rule requires a district court on remand to effect our mandate and to do nothing else” and that the district court “must implement both the letter and the spirit of the appellate court’s mandate”
• stating \the mandate rule requires a district court on remand to effect our mandate and to do nothing else” and that the district court \must implement both the letter and the spirit of the appellate court’s mandate”
• “ ‘The mandate rule requires a district court on remand to effect our mandate and to do nothing else.’”
• “The mandate rule requires a district court on remand to effect [the appellate court’s] mandate and to do nothing else.”
• “[O]n remand the district court must implement both the letter and the spirit of the appellate court’s mandate[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).