Case Citator › Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Harmonic Design, Inc.

Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Harmonic Design, Inc.

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

Overruled in part
Court
Federal Circuit
Citation
153 F.3d 1318
Decided
Confirmed treatments
2
Flagged citations read
71 of 71
Citing cases (total)
141
Treatment dates
1999–2001
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Harmonic Design, Inc. was overruled in part: all 71 flagged citations have been read, and the 2 confirmed treatments are listed below. The Federal Circuit, sitting en banc in Midwest Industries, Inc. v. Karavan Trailers, Inc., overruled Hunter Douglas's instruction to use regional circuit law for patent preemption and conflict questions.
More on how this was screened

Meyers v. Bayer AG separately questioned Hunter Douglas's reading of patent jurisdiction. The other reviewed opinions applied the remaining holdings, distinguished their facts, or reported Midwest's overruling without themselves acting on Hunter Douglas.

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.

141 later cases cite Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Harmonic Design, Inc.; 71 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 Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Harmonic Design, 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 Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, overruled Hunter Douglas's choice of regional circuit law for conflicts between patent law and other legal rights, adopting Federal Circuit law for those questions.

    Midwest Industries, Inc. v. Karavan Trailers, Inc. · Federal Circuit (en banc) · filed

    To the extent that Cable Electric Products, Inc. v. Genmark, Inc., Interpart Corp. v. Italia, and Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Harmonic Design, Inc., hold that we are required to apply regional circuit law to conflicts between patent law and other legal rights, we therefore overrule those decisions.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Questioned

  • The district court expressed doubt about Hunter Douglas's interpretation of patent jurisdiction, favoring a competing reading while leaving the issue undecided.

    Meyers v. Bayer AG · E.D. Wis. · filed

    Although I am inclined towards Altman’s interpretation of Christianson over Hunter Douglas’s interpretation, it is not an easy call.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Harmonic Design, 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