Rovico, Inc. v. Am. Photocopy Equip. Co., 390 U.S. 945 (1968). · Go Syfert
Search
Rovico, Inc. v. Am. Photocopy Equip. Co., 390 U.S. 945 (1968). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
38 citation events across 16 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Shelcore, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Durham Industries, Inc., Appellee/cross-Appellant (cafc, 1984-09-28)
Treatment trajectory · 1968 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1968 1997 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Shelcore, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Durham Industries, Inc., Appellee/cross-Appellant
Fed. Cir. · 1984 · signal: see · confidence high
See American Photocopy Equipment Co. v. Rovico, Inc., 384 F.2d 813, 815-16 , 155 USPQ 119 , 120 (7th Cir.1967), cert, denied, 390 U.S. 945 , 88 S.Ct. 1030 , 19 L.Ed.2d 1133 (1968) (infringer has burden of demonstrating that there is a material distinction between his case and the prior case holding the patent 'valid').’’ See also Environmental Designs, Ltd. v. Union Oil Co., 713 F.2d 693 , 699 n. 9, 218 USPQ 865 , 871 n. 9 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert, denied, 464 U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 709 , 79 L.Ed.2d 173 (1984). 11 .
discussed Cited "see" Richard Lawrence Stevenson v. Sears, Roebuck & Company
Fed. Cir. · 1983 · signal: see · confidence high
See American Photocopy Equipment Co. v. Rovico, Inc., 384 F.2d 813, 815-16 , 155 USPQ 119 , 120 (7th Cir.1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 945 , 88 S.Ct. 1030 , 19 L.Ed.2d 1133 (1968) (infringer has burden of demonstrating that there is a material distinction between his case and the prior case holding the patent “valid”).
cited Cited "see" Mercantile National Bank of Chicago v. Howmet Corporation
7th Cir. · 1975 · signal: see · confidence high
See American Photocopy Equipment Co. v. Rovico, Inc., 384 F.2d 813, 815-816 (7th Cir. 1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 945 , 88 S.Ct. 1030 , 19 L.Ed.2d 1133 (1968).
discussed Cited "see" Roy Paul Perez, Individually, Etc. v. Ford Motor Company, Traders & General Insurance Company, Intervenor
5th Cir. · 1974 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, Schemel v. General Motors Corp., 384 F.2d 802 (7th Cir. 1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 945 , 88 S.Ct. 1030 , 19 L.Ed.2d 1134 (1968); Shumard v. General Motors Corp., 270 F.Supp. 311 (S.D.Ohio 1967); Willis v. Chrysler Corp., 264 F.Supp. 1010 (S.D.Tex.1967).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States of America Ex Rel. Cosme Rosado v. Walter J. Flood, Warden of the Nassau County Jail (2×)
2d Cir. · 1968 · signal: see also · confidence low
If we had to deal with the effect of Katz on this case, we would be faced with such issues as to what extent, if any, that decision is retroactive, cf. Linkletter v. Walker, 381 U.S. 618 , 85 S.Ct. 1731 , 14 L.Ed.2d 601 (1965); compare Berger v. State of New York, 388 U.S. 41 , 87 S.Ct. 1873 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1040 (1967), with People v. Kaiser, supra; see also Desist v. United States, 390 U.S. 943 , 88 S.Ct. 1030 , 19 L.Ed.2d 1131 (1968) (granting certiorari), and whether the wiretapping here accorded with the procedural safeguards required by Katz .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Wolfson
S.D.N.Y. · 1968 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare United States v. Desist, 277 F.Supp. 690 , aff’d, 384 F.2d 889 (2d Cir. 1967), cert. granted, 390 U.S. 943 , 88 S.Ct. 1030 , 19 L.Ed.2d 1131 (March 4, 1968) and Lawn v. United States, 355 U.S. 339 , 78 S.Ct. 311 , 2 L.Ed.2d 321 (1958), affirming United States v. Giglio, 232 F.2d 589 (2d Cir. 1956), affirming 16 F.R.D. 268 (S.D.N.Y.1954).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rovico, Inc.
v.
American Photocopy Equipment Co.
No. 906.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 4, 1968.
390 U.S. 945
Samuel J. Stoll for petitioner. William C. Conner, Albert E. Jenner, Jr., John J. Crown and Robert A. Curley for respondent.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.