Nike Incorporated v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc., Brooks Shoe, Inc., and Brooks Sports, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• describing with approval the use of a dictionary definition by the district court
• reject- ing the patentee’s proposed claim construction that would, “in effect, rewrite its patent claims to suit its needs in this litigation”
• “The grant of summary judgment [in a patent case] is appropriate where the standards set forth in Rule 56(c) are satisfied.”
• “Summary judgment is appropriate in a patent case, as in' other cases, when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
• “Summary judgment is appropriate in a patent case, as in other cases, when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
• “Summary judgment is appropriate in a patent case, as in other cases, when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).