FEDERAL · 35 U.S.C. · Chapter 29
Remedy for infringement of patent
Current through Pub. L. 119-102
A patentee shall have remedy by civil action for infringement of his patent.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
35 U.S.C. § 281 (Remedy for infringement of patent) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
The Read Corporation and F.T. Read & Sons, Inc. v. Portec, Inc., D/B/A Portec/kolberg Division
970 F.2d 816 (Federal Circuit, 1992)
T. B. Harms Company v. Edward Eliscu and Ross Jungnickel, Inc.
339 F.2d 823 (Second Circuit, 1964)
Textile Productions, Inc. v. Mead Corporation and Fiber Trim Sewing Company
134 F.3d 1481 (Federal Circuit, 1998)
Swofford v. B & W, Inc.
336 F.2d 406 (Fifth Circuit, 1964)
Billy K. Watkins v. Northwestern Ohio Tractor Pullers Association, Inc.
630 F.2d 1155 (Sixth Circuit, 1980)
Zenith Electronics Corporation, and Elo Touchsystems, Inc. v. Exzec, Inc.
182 F.3d 1340 (Federal Circuit, 1999)
William Gluckin & Co., Inc. v. International Playtex Corporation
407 F.2d 177 (Second Circuit, 1969)
Arachnid, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Merit Industries, Inc.
939 F.2d 1574 (Federal Circuit, 1991)
Morrow Ex Rel. General Unsecured Creditors' Liquidating Trust of at Home Corp. v. Microsoft Corp.
499 F.3d 1332 (Federal Circuit, 2007)
Sicom Systems Ltd. v. Agilent Technologies, Inc., and Tektronix, Inc., and Lecroy Corporation
427 F.3d 971 (Federal Circuit, 2005)
Intellectual Property Development, Inc. v. Tci Cablevision of California, Inc.
248 F.3d 1333 (Federal Circuit, 2001)
Pandrol Usa, Lp and Pandrol Limited v. Airboss Railway Products, Inc., Airboss of America Corp., Robert M. Magnuson, and Jose R. Mediavilla
320 F.3d 1354 (Federal Circuit, 2003)
Atari Games Corporation and Tengen, Inc., Plaintiffs/cross-Appellants v. Nintendo of America, Inc., and Nintendo Co., Ltd.
897 F.2d 1572 (Federal Circuit, 1990)
Mentor H/s, Inc. v. Medical Device Alliance, Inc., Lysonix, Inc. And Misonix, Inc., Defendants-Appellees/cross-Appellants
240 F.3d 1016 (Federal Circuit, 2001)
Israel Bio-Engineering Project v. Amgen Inc.
475 F.3d 1256 (Federal Circuit, 2007)
WiAV Solutions LLC v. Motorola, Inc.
631 F.3d 1257 (Federal Circuit, 2010)
John W. Bentley v. Sunset House Distributing Corp., Etc.
359 F.2d 140 (Ninth Circuit, 1966)
John Deere Company of Kansas City, a Corporation, and Deere & Company, a Corporation v. William T. Graham, and Graham Plow, Inc.
333 F.2d 529 (Eighth Circuit, 1964)
Gaia Technologies, Inc. v. Reconversion Technologies, Inc.
93 F.3d 774 (Federal Circuit, 1996)
Eltra Corporation v. Basic Incorporated
599 F.2d 745 (Sixth Circuit, 1979)
Source Credit
History
(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 812.)
Editorial Notes
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §§67 and 70, part (R.S. 4919; R.S. 4921, amended (1) Mar. 3, 1897, ch. 391, §6, 29 Stat. 694, (2) Feb. 18, 1922, ch. 58, §8, 42 Stat. 392, (3) Aug. 1, 1946, ch. 726, §1, 60 Stat. 778).
The corresponding two sections of existing law are divided among sections 281, 283, 284, 285, 286 and 289 with some changes in language. Section 281 serves as an introduction or preamble to the following sections, the modern term civil action is used, there would be, of course, a right to a jury trial when no injunction is sought.
Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §§67 and 70, part (R.S. 4919; R.S. 4921, amended (1) Mar. 3, 1897, ch. 391, §6, 29 Stat. 694, (2) Feb. 18, 1922, ch. 58, §8, 42 Stat. 392, (3) Aug. 1, 1946, ch. 726, §1, 60 Stat. 778).
The corresponding two sections of existing law are divided among sections 281, 283, 284, 285, 286 and 289 with some changes in language. Section 281 serves as an introduction or preamble to the following sections, the modern term civil action is used, there would be, of course, a right to a jury trial when no injunction is sought.