Larson v. Correct Craft, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “because being declared the sole inventor will not generate any other direct financial rewards” there was no concrete financial interest
• holding that a plaintiff who “affirmatively transferred title to the patents” lacked standing to pursue a correction of inventorship claim because he would financially “reap no benefit” from correction
• holding that “questions of patent owner- ship are determined by state law”
• dismissing case because Plaintiffs financial interests depended on his obtaining rescission of his patent assignments
• declining to address reputational interests when the plaintiff had claimed no reputational injury
• declining to address reputational interests when the plaintiff had claimed no reputational injury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).