Lindemann Maschinenfabrik Gmbh v. American Hoist & Derrick Company, Harris Press & Shear Division and Commercial Metals Company

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming $10,000 reasonable royalty award because patentee failed to provide sufficient evi- dence to support a greater award
• affirming $10,000 reasonable royalty award because patentee failed to provide sufficient evidence to support a greater award
• affirming award of minimal damages when no reliable proof of a reasonable royalty was present
• reminding counsel that “one does not persuade by insulting the intelligence of the persuadees”
• “In patent law, the fact of infringement establishes the fact of damage because the patentee’s right to exclude has been violated.”
• “Because Lindemann did not compete in the sale of its invention in the United States, it did not, as it could not, seek damages on the basis of lost profits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).