Jack Guttman, Inc. v. Kopykake Enterprises, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing a trial court may deny a motion based on a moving party’s failure to show any one of the four factors
• noting that claim construction may be revisited and altered on a “rolling” basis as “understanding of the tech- nology evolves”
• explaining that a district court may “issue only a tentative claim construction and . . . base its resolution of a preliminary injunction motion upon that tentative claim construction”
• explaining that “[d]istrict courts may engage in a rolling claim construction”
• declining to limit “non-tortuous copy path” to a substantially straight copy path where the former could encompass curved, but non-tortuous, paths
• “[T]he appropriate remedy is not to reverse with instructions to enter the injunction, as Guttman asks, but rather to vacate the trial court’s previous order and remand for further proceedings in light of this opinion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).