The D.L. Auld Company v. Chroma Graphics Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that because the alleged infringer “established a prima facie case, it fell to [the patentee] to submit evidence, by affidavit or otherwise, setting forth specific facts raising a genuine issue for trial”
• issues of material fact are not raised by affidavits which do not even contradict the patent owner/inventor’s own prior admissions
• alleged infringer having shown prima facie case, it therefore fell to patentee to submit contrary evidence to defeat summary judg ment
• Auld’s affidavit failed to contradict prior testimony of inventor thereby proving “even less capable of showing genuine issue of material fact”
• “[I]f a mere allegation of experimental intent were sufficient, there would rarely if ever be room for summary judgment based on a true ‘on sale’ defense under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).”
• “[I]f a mere allegation of experimental intent were sufficient, there would rarely if ever be room for summary judgment based on a true ‘on sale’ defense under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).