Seattle Box Co., Inc. v. Industrial Crating & Packing
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
756 F.2d 1574, 225 U.S.P.Q. 357 (1985)
- Written by Nicole Gray , JD
Facts
This case was remanded to a district court for consideration of Industrial Crating & Packing’s (Industrial) (plaintiff) defense of intervening rights to infringement of Seattle Box Co.’s (Seattle Box) (defendant) reissue patent, claiming a method for transporting oil pipes using spacers. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit provided a detailed analysis of the law regarding the issue and suggested that the district court employ one of the following options considering Industrial’s defense: allow it to use all its remaining infringing spacers; allow it to continue using the spacers with restrictions; or allow it to continue business unconditionally. On remand, Industrial presented evidence that it had enough infringing spacers on-hand to transport 224 bundles of pipe, pre-reissue. Industrial had manufactured the spacers after advice from counsel on how not to infringe the original patent. Of the 224 bundles, 114 of the bundles were transported post-reissue in fulfilment of pre-reissue contracts. Altogether, Industrial transported 919 bundles of pipe with infringing spacers. The district court held that Industrial failed to set forth good and valid reasons for it to use its discretion regarding intervening rights with respect to the spacers Industrial had on-hand pre-reissue. Industrial appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Davis, J.)
Dissent (Nichols, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.