Skip to main content
· 11/26/2008

Pall Corp. v. Entegris, Inc.

Citations

  • 655 F. Supp. 2d 169
  • 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96682
  • 2008 WL 5049961

How courts have described this case

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

  • \[A] magistrate judge's decision is contrary to law only where it runs counter to controlling authority.\
  • “[U]nlike prosecution of an initial patent application, the Patent Act expressly curtails the scope of reexamination, prohibiting any claim amendment that would enlarge the scope of the initial patent”
  • “[T]he district court must affirm the decision of the magistrate judge unless the district court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Mauskopf

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.