Technitrol, Inc., & Cross-Appellee v. Ncr Corp., & Cross-Appellant, 513 F.2d 1130 (7th Cir. 1975). · Go Syfert
Search
Technitrol, Inc., & Cross-Appellee v. Ncr Corp., & Cross-Appellant, 513 F.2d 1130 (7th Cir. 1975). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
27 citation events across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: A.C. Aukerman Company v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co. (cafc, 1992-05-19)
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1975 2000 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" A.C. Aukerman Company v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co. (2×)
Fed. Cir. · 1992 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Technitrol, Inc. v. NCR Corp., 513 F.2d 1130 (7th Cir.1975) (adopting, inter alia, Part II of district court opinion in Technitrol, Inc. v. Memorex Corp., 376 F.Supp. 828, 830-32 (N.D.Ill.1974)).
cited Cited "see" Lemelson v. Carolina Enterprises, Inc.
S.D.N.Y. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally Technitrol, Inc. v. Memorex Corp., 376 F.Supp. 828, 831-32 (N.D.Ill.1974), aff'd, 513 F.2d 1130 (6th Cir. 1975). 25 .
cited Cited "see" Dymo Industries, Inc. v. Monarch Marking Systems, Inc.
N.D. Tex. · 1979 · signal: see · confidence high
See Technitrol, Inc. v. Memorex Corp., 376 F.Supp. 828 (N.D.Ill.1974), aff’d per curiam, 513 F.2d 1130 (7th Cir. 1975).
cited Cited "see" Van't Veld v. Honeywell, Inc.
D.D.C. · 1977 · signal: see · confidence high
See Technitrol, Inc. v. Memorex Corporation, 376 F.Supp. 828, 832 (N.D.Ill.1974), aff’d, 513 F.2d 1130 (7th Cir. 1975).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Technitrol, Inc., and Cross-Appellee
v.
Ncr Corporation, and Cross-Appellant
74-1904.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Apr 18, 1975.
513 F.2d 1130
Published

513 F.2d 1130

TECHNITROL, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Appellee,
v.
NCR CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee and Cross-Appellant.

Nos. 74-1904, 74-1905.

United States Court of Appeals,
Seventh Circuit.

Argued Feb. 21, 1975.
Decided April 18, 1975.

Theodore W. Anderson and William M. Wesley, Chicago, Ill., for NCR corp.

S. C. Yuter, New York City, for Technitrol.

Before CUMMINGS, PELL and TONE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

Plaintiff Technitrol, Inc. appeals from an order granting summary judgment, based upon laches, in favor of the defendant NCR Corporation. Defendant NCR Corporation cross-appeals from the same order, arguing that it should have been awarded attorney fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Although the District Court did not finally adjudicate the claims against another defendant, the order is appealable because it included a determination and direction for the entry of judgment as to NCR pursuant to Rule 54(b), Fed.R.Civ.P. We affirm the judgment of the District Court in all respects and adopt Parts I through IV of the memorandum opinion and order of that court, Technitrol, Inc. v. Memorex Corp., 376 F.Supp. 828 (N.D.Ill.1974), as the opinion of this court.

2

Affirmed.