· 10/16/1997
Scherbatskoy v. Halliburton Company
Citations
- 125 F.3d 288
- 44 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1466
- 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 28642
- 1997 WL 603831
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that an action arises under federal patent law, conferring exclusive federal jurisdiction, when resolution of state claims for breach of contract and fiduciary duty depends on application of federal patent laws
- holding that an action arises under federal patent law, conferring exclusive federal jurisdiction, when resolution of state claims for breach of contract and fiduciary duty depends on application of federal patent laws
- holding that an action arises under federal patent law, conferring exclusive federal jurisdiction, when resolution of state claims for breach of contract and fiduciary duty depends on application of federal patent laws
- holding Section 1338 jurisdiction existed over state law breach of contract claim when plaintiff was required to prove patent infringement
- holding Section 1338 jurisdiction existed over state law breach of contract claim when plaintiff was required to prove patent infringement
- holding Section 1338 jurisdiction existed over state law breach of contract claim when plaintiff was required to prove patent infringement
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Politz, Davis, Benavides
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.