| dbo:description
|
- talk in Francais (fr)
- American legal case involving the computer printer company Lexmark (en)
|
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:appealedTo
| |
| dbp:arguedate
|
- 0001-12-03 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
| dbp:argueyear
| |
| dbp:case
|
- Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., No. 03-5400 (en)
- Static Control Components, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., Nos. 09–6287, 09–6288, 09–6449 (en)
|
| dbp:citations
| |
| dbp:court
| |
| dbp:dateDecided
|
- 2004-10-26 (xsd:date)
- 2012-08-29 (xsd:date)
|
| dbp:decidedate
|
- 0001-03-25 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
| dbp:decideyear
| |
| dbp:decisionBy
| |
| dbp:docket
| |
| dbp:findlaw
| |
| dbp:fullName
|
- Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (en)
- Static Control Components, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc. (en)
|
| dbp:fullname
|
- Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (en)
|
| dbp:holding
|
- Judgment AFFIRMED. Static Control's alleged injuries - lost sales and damage to its business reputation - fall within the zone of interests protected by the Lanham Act, and Static Control sufficiently alleged that its injuries were proximately caused by Lexmark's misrepresentations. (en)
|
| dbp:joinmajority
| |
| dbp:judges
|
- Gilbert Stroud Merritt, Jr., Jeffrey S. Sutton, and John Feikens (en)
- Damon Keith, Danny Julian Boggs, and Karen Nelson Moore (en)
|
| dbp:litigants
|
- Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (en)
|
| dbp:majority
| |
| dbp:name
|
- Lexmark Int'l v. Static Control Components (en)
- Static Control Components v. Lexmark Intern., Inc. (en)
|
| dbp:opinions
|
- Static Control Components lacked standing to pursue a federal antitrust claim under the Clayton Act or the Sherman Act, but could pursue a false association claim under the Lanham Act, as different tests for standing applied. (en)
- District court erroneously granted summary judgment for plaintiff on claim under Digital Millennium Copyright Act based on defendant's manufacture of computer chips that enabled third party manufacturers to produce toner cartridges that were compatible with laser printers manufactured by plaintiff (en)
|
| dbp:oralargument
| |
| dbp:parallelcitations
| |
| dbp:prior
| |
| dbp:priorActions
|
- 2006 (xsd:integer)
- 172800.0 (dbd:second)
|
| dbp:subsequentActions
|
- Rehearing denied en banc, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 23975 (en)
- rehearing denied, Dec. 29, 2004; and rehearing en banc denied, Feb. 15, 2005; case remanded to district court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion. (en)
|
| dbp:uspage
| |
| dbp:usvol
| |
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dct:subject
| |
| rdf:type
| |
| rdfs:label
|
- Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (en)
|
| owl:sameAs
|
- freebase:Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.
- yago-res:Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.
- wikidata:Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.
- dbpedia-global:Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.
- dbr:Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.
|
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| foaf:name
|
- Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (en)
|
| is dbo:wikiPageRedirects
of | |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
| is rdfs:seeAlso
of | |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
