Case Citator › Automatic Radio Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.

Automatic Radio Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
339 U.S. 827
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
47 of 47
Citing cases (total)
47
Treatment dates
1969
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Automatic Radio Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. was overruled in part. The Supreme Court overruled its patent licensee estoppel holding in Lear, Inc. v. Adkins, allowing a licensee to challenge a patent's validity.
More on how this was screened

Its royalty ruling and observation about affidavits continued to be cited. The confirmed treatment is listed below. All 47 flagged citations have been read.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

47 later cases cite Automatic Radio Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.; 47 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Automatic Radio Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The Supreme Court overruled Automatic Radio's rule barring a patent licensee from contesting the licensed patent's validity.

    Lear, Inc. v. Adkins · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    We are satisfied that Automatic Radio Manufacturing Co. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., supra, itself the product of a clouded history, should no longer be regarded as sound law with respect to its “estoppel” holding, and that holding is now overruled.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Automatic Radio Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace