Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

H.H. Robertson, Co. v. United States Steel Deck, Inc.

820 F.2d 384, 2 U.S.P.Q.2d 1926 (1987)

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

H.H. Robertson, Co. v. United States Steel Deck, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

820 F.2d 384, 2 U.S.P.Q.2d 1926 (1987)

Facts

H. H. Robertson Company (Robertson) (plaintiff) sued United Steel Deck, Inc. (Steel Deck) and Nicholas J. Bouras, Inc. (Bouras) (defendants) in federal court for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 3,721,051 (the 051 patent). Robertson moved for a preliminary injunction to prevent Steel Deck and Bouras from making, selling, or using the accused structures. In an earlier case involving the 051 patent and different infringers, an Ohio court found that the 051 patent was valid. Steel Deck and Bouras supplied the prior-art references considered by the Ohio court to the district court for review, as well as three new prior-art references. The district court also heard expert testimony from each party on the issue of infringement. The district court issued a preliminary injunction, holding that Robertson had established a reasonable likelihood of success on the issues of patent validity and infringement. For the validity finding, the district court relied on the prior-art analysis of the Ohio court. The district court also held that irreparable injury was presumed because Robertson had established a likelihood of success on the issues of infringement and validity. The district court held that the balance of equities weighed in favor of granting a preliminary injunction after comparing Steel Deck and Bouras’s assertions that granting a preliminary injunction would disrupt business and cause job loss against Robertson’s assertions that denying the preliminary injunction would harm Robertson’s business and patent rights. Steel Deck and Bouras appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Newman, 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 604,000 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 604,000 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 604,000 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