⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

20 opinions for “FRANK v. 3M COMPANY”

Bhatia v. 3M Co.public domain
District Court, D. Maine · 2018-03-01 · Published · cited 9× · 323 F. Supp. 3d 1082
DONOVAN W. FRANK, United States District Judge *1089INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court on a Partial Motion to Dismiss and Strike Plaintiffs' Consolidated Amended Complaint (the "Amended Complaint") brought by Defendant 3M Company ("3M" or "Defendant") (Doc. No. 87). For the reasons set forth below, the Court gran
Hayden v. 3M Co.public domain
Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2017-02-03 · Published · cited 2× · 211 So. 3d 528; 2016 La.App. 4 Cir. 1030; 2017 WL 462153; 2017 La. App. LEXIS 134
Judge Roland L. Belsome hln preparation for trial on this meso-thelioma case, the plaintiff served trial subpoenas on numerous defendant corporations for the in-court appearance of a corporate representative at trial. The defendant corporations filed motions to quash the subpoenas. The trial court granted the motions to quash as to the corporations that were not domiciled in Louisiana. The plaintiff filed an application for su
Glenn v. 3M Companypublic domain
Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2023-04-05 · Published · cited 0×
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals Rita Joyce Glenn, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Thomas Harold Glenn, deceased, Respondent, v. 3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co.; Air & Liquid Systems Corporation, Individually and as Successor-In-Interest to Buffalo Pumps; Airgas USA, LLC; Aurora Pump; BW/IP Inc., a Subsidiary of Flowserve Corporation; CBS Corporation, a Delaware Corporation f/k/a Viacom, Inc., Success
District Court, D. Minnesota · 2015-05-19 · Published · cited 0× · 109 F. Supp. 3d 1115; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65011; 2015 WL 2381046
*1118MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DONOVAN W. FRANK, District Judge. INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court on the issue of patent claim construction pursuant to Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370, 116 S.Ct. 1384, 134 L.Ed.2d 577 (1996). BACKGROUND This liti
Frank v. Walkerpublic domain
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2016-07-19 · Published · cited 7× · 196 F. Supp. 3d 893; 95 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 111; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93878; 2016 WL 3948068
DECISION AND ORDER LYNN ADELMAN, District Judge The plaintiffs, a number of individuals who are eligible to vote in Wisconsin, filed this suit in 2011, alleging that Wisconsin’s law requiring them to present photo identification at the polls, 2011 Wis. Act 23 (“Act 23”), violates the Constitution and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Following a trial on the claims alleged in this and a companion case,
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004-01-20 · Published · cited 90× · 350 F.3d 1365; 2003 WL 22844387
350 F.3d 1365 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY and Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.AVERY DENNISON CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 03-1203. United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Decided: December 2, 2003. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied January 20, 2004.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2009-07-23 · Published · cited 152× · 575 F.3d 1235; 91 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1545; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16600; 2009 WL 2182605
575 F.3d 1235 (2009) SOUTHERN GROUTS & MORTARS, INC., a Florida corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 3M COMPANY, a Foreign corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 08-15850. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. July 23, 2009. *1238 Gustavo Sardina, Frank Herrera, JanPaul Guzman, Rothstein, Rosenfeldt & Adler, Ft.
District Court, D. Minnesota · 2002-02-15 · Published · cited 3× · 185 F. Supp. 2d 1031; 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3186; 2002 WL 257511
185 F.Supp.2d 1031 (2002) 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY and Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, Plaintiffs, v. AVERY DENNISON CORPORATION, Defendant. No. CIV 01-1781 (DSD/FLN). United States District Court, D. Minnesota. February 15, 2002. *1032 *1033 *
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013-08-06 · Published · cited 157× · 725 F.3d 1315; 107 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1717; 2013 WL 3984988; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 16203
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY AND 3M COMPANY, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. TREDEGAR CORPORATION AND TREDEGAR FILM PRODUCTS CORPORATION, Defendants-Appellees. ______________________ 2012-1241 ______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993-04-09 · Published · cited 28× · 990 F.2d 974; 16 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2008; 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 7603; 1993 WL 105113
POSNER, Circuit Judge. This is a suit, primarily for fraud in violation of the common law of Illinois, that has been brought in federal court under the diversity jurisdiction. A count that charged a violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, was dismissed early on because the plaintiff had not filed a timely charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Later the court granted s
Missouri Court of Appeals · 2015-04-28 · Published · cited 12× · 480 S.W.3d 354; 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 446; 2015 WL 1915242
Lisa S. Van Amburg, Judge I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County in favor of defendants Frank J. Miceli, in his individual capacity and as trustee of the Frank Miceli Revocable Trust,. the unknown beneficiaries of said trust, Stephen Miceli, in his individual capacity
Court of Appeals of Texas · 2015-07-14 · Published · cited 0×
^ ORIGINAL ^4ujfo,%X*t PRECEIVED IN COL'RT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS JUL 14 2015 /^/////^/%*sA &dj*jJy Ap;//^ijj/?s<3j£ Abel Acosfa, Cfark ^ FILED IN -uhT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS JUL H 2015 A/aJ£"/?-dao97'&<
District Court, D. Minnesota · 2005-03-08 · Published · cited 21× · 361 F. Supp. 2d 958; 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4797; 2005 WL 674621
361 F.Supp.2d 958 (2005) 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY and Dyneon LLC, Plaintiffs/Counterclaim Defendants, v. DUPONT DOW ELASTOMERS LLC, Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff. No. CIV. 03-3364MJDJGL. United States District Court, D. Minnesota. March 8, 2005. *959 *960
Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2021-09-01 · Published · cited 0×
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals Beverly Dale Jolly and Brenda Rice Jolly, Respondents, v. General Electric Company, et al., Defendants, Of whom Fisher Controls International LLC and Crosby Valve, LLC are the Appellants. Appellate Case No. 2017-002611 Appeal From Spartanburg County Jean Hoefer Toal, Acting Circuit Court Judge Opinion No. 5858 Heard November 2, 2020 – Filed September 1, 2021
Court of Chancery of Delaware · 2020-01-31 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE APPRAISAL OF PANERA ) BREAD COMPANY ) C.A. No. 2017-0593-MTZ ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Date Submitted: October 7, 2019 Date Decided: January 31, 2020 Samuel T. Hirzel, II, Elizabeth A. DeFelice, and Melissa N. Donimirski, HEYMAN ENERIO GATTUSO & HIRZEL LLP, Wilmington, Delaware
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992-11-30 · Published · cited 214× · 976 F.2d 1559; 1992 WL 247410
RICH, Circuit Judge. Johnson & Johnson Orthopaedics, Inc. (JJO) appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, Fourth Division, Civil Action No. 4-86-359, holding JJO liable for infringement of claims 1-4 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 4,502,479, issued to Garwood et al. in 1985 (the Garwood patent); willful infri
United States Tax Court · 2013-08-05 · Published · cited 1× · 141 T.C. No. 1
141 T.C. No. 1 UNITED STATES TAX COURT JOHN HANCOCK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY (U.S.A.), AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO JOHN HANCOCK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY (f.k.a. JOHN HANCOCK MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY) AND SUBSIDIARIES, ET AL.,1 Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket Nos. 6404-09, 7083-10, Filed August 5, 2013. 7084-10.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1975-07-23 · Published · cited 11× · 521 F.2d 1162; 186 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 464; 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 13549
JOHN W. PECK, Circuit Judge. This is the second appeal in this patent infringement action brought by plaintiff Frank Buzzelli against defendant Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (hereinafter “3M”). The first appeal resulted in the reversal of a summary judgment entered in favor of 3M on the grounds that the district court f
Mississippi Supreme Court · 2005-06-30 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2005-IA-01406-SCT ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY v. LONNIE ADAMS, JR., ET AL. ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: GLENN F. BECKHAM LONNIE D. BAILEY EDWARD BLACKMON, JR. FRANK JONES ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: WIL
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2004-08-23 · Published · cited 164× · 380 F.3d 1066; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 17860; 2004 WL 1872703
LOKEN, Chief Judge. Enervations, Inc. commenced this action against Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. (3M) alleging breach of an Authorized Distributor Agreement (the Agreement) that granted Enervations the exclusive right to distribute 3M window film products in a designated territory. The district court 1 gra