Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Electromotive Division of General Motors Corp. v. Transportation Systems Division of General Electric Co.

417 F.3d 1203, 75 U.S.P.Q.2d 1650 (Fed.Cir.2005)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...

Electromotive Division of General Motors Corp. v. Transportation Systems Division of General Electric Co.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

417 F.3d 1203, 75 U.S.P.Q.2d 1650 (Fed.Cir.2005)

Facts

In September 1992, Electromotive Division of General Motors Corp. (EMD) (plaintiff) designed a planetary bearing for use in locomotives. In January 1993, EMD began testing the bearings indoors for durability and reliability. In March 1993, EMD proceeded to test the bearings outdoors, under actual use conditions, to verify durability. As part of this field testing, EMD requested permission from Union Pacific railroad (UP) to install the bearings in some of its locomotives. UP agreed, but did not execute any confidentiality agreement or other document indicating participation in the testing. EMD did not restrict UP’s use of the locomotives containing the bearings, nor did EMD require monitoring, reports, or documentation of use. After installing the bearings, EMD shipped the locomotives to UP in July 1993. On September 29, 1994, EMD filed a patent application for the bearings. EMD thereafter filed an infringement suit against Transportation Systems Division of General Electric Co. (GE) (defendant). GE moved for summary judgment, contending the patent was invalid under the on sale bar of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). EMD cross-moved for summary judgment, contending the bar was inapplicable because the pre-critical date use of the bearings was experimental. The district court granted GE’s motion. EMD appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Michel, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 606,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 606,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 606,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,800 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership