This video is brought to you by Patreon supporter DJ Gilcrease. Thank you, DJ!
Lexmark has a history of locking-down its ink and toner cartridges and suing those who try to bypass their technology.
Let’s discuss how Lexmark earned themselves multiple benchslaps and made patent history in the process.
Supreme Court Opinion in Lexmark v. Impression Products: [pdf-embedder url=”http://lawfulmasses.com/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2018/06/roberts-opinion-impression-products-lexmark.pdf” title=”roberts opinion impression products lexmark”]
Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion: [pdf-embedder url=”http://lawfulmasses.com/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2018/06/appeal-court-opinion.pdf” title=”appeal court opinion”]
District Court Stipulated Judgment: [pdf-embedder url=”http://lawfulmasses.com/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2018/06/District-Court-Stip-Judgment.pdf” title=”District Court Stip Judgment”]
Lexmark’s Original Complaint: [pdf-embedder url=”http://lawfulmasses.com/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2018/06/original-complaint-with-patent-numbers.pdf” title=”original complaint with patent numbers”]
Supreme Court Opinion in Lexmark v. Static Control Components: [pdf-embedder url=”http://lawfulmasses.com/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2018/06/Lexmark-v.-SCC.pdf” title=”Lexmark v. SCC”]
Supreme Court Opinion in Bowman v. Monsanto: [pdf-embedder url=”http://lawfulmasses.com/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2018/06/bowman-v.-Monsanto-11-796_c07d.pdf” title=”bowman v. Monsanto 11-796_c07d”]