Sentry Protection Products, Inc. v. Eagle Manufacturing Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that pleading that the “infringements have been willful and with full knowledge of the [patents-in-suit]” was sufficient to plead compliance with the marking statute
• determining that the district court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant when the patentee offered an affidavit stating that its products were marked along with sales documents during the alleged period of infringement
• “Sentry’s pleading that the ‘infringements have been willful and with full knowledge of the [patents-in-suit]’ was sufficient”
• “More relevant to the present case is the Supreme Court’s statement, in reference to both actual notice and marking, that ‘the duty of alleging and the burden of proving either of these facts is upon the plaintiff.’” (citing Dunlap, 152 U.S. at 248)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).