Skip to main content
· 6/11/1991

Slimfold Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Kinkead Industries, Inc., and United States Gypsum Company, Defendants/cross-Appellants

Citations

  • 932 F.2d 1453
  • 1991 WL 77157

How courts have described this case

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

  • asserting that “an attorney fees determination ‘should not result in a second major litigation’ ”
  • recognizing that “insufficient documentation” may warrant a reduction in fees
  • noting that “a district court itself has experience in determining what are reasonable hours ..., and should rely on that experience and knowledge if the documentation is considered inadequate”
  • “Designing around patents is, in fact, one of the ways in which the patent system works to the advantage of the public in promoting progress in the useful arts, its constitutional purpose.”
  • even where documentation is flawed, the, question is whether the documentation is fairly detailed and extensive, such that the court can determine the reasonableness of the fees claimed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rich, Archer, Michel

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.