Dantoni v. Mullen
Dantoni v. Mullen is a federal patent lawsuit filed on 03/10/1993 in the District Court, D. Maryland. The case was terminated on 05/20/1993.
A lawsuit records allegations and procedural activity. Being named as a party does not establish liability, wrongdoing, or the merits of any claim.
- Court
- District Court, D. Maryland (D. Maryland)
Official Court Website → - Assigned judge
- Frank A. Kaufman · 943 cases in index
- Docket number
- 1:93-cv-00718
- Nature of suit
- 830 Patent
Infringement of a patented invention. - Jurisdiction
- Federal question
- Date filed
- 03/10/1993
- Date terminated
- 05/20/1993
758 Patent cases in this court are indexed here.
About Patent Lawsuits
Patent lawsuits allege infringement of a patented invention — that another party made, used, or sold a protected technology without authorization. These cases are common in technology and pharmaceutical industries.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Dantoni v. Mullen?
Dantoni v. Mullen is a federal patent lawsuit filed on 03/10/1993 in the District Court, D. Maryland. The case was terminated on 05/20/1993. Patent lawsuits allege infringement of a patented invention — that another party made, used, or sold a protected technology without authorization. These cases are common in technology and pharmaceutical industries.
What type of case is this?
It is classified as “Patent” under the federal nature-of-suit system. Patent lawsuits allege infringement of a patented invention — that another party made, used, or sold a protected technology without authorization. These cases are common in technology and pharmaceutical industries.
What court is the case in?
The case is in the District Court, D. Maryland, docket number 1:93-cv-00718.
When was the case filed?
Dantoni v. Mullen was filed on 03/10/1993. It was terminated on 05/20/1993.
Other Cases Involving These Parties
Related Patent Cases
Source: public U.S. federal court record — docket 9596346 in the CourtListener/RECAP archive (verify this docket), court docket number 1:93-cv-00718 on PACER. Court, party, date and judge fields are reproduced from that record; case-type categories, statute decoding and all aggregate figures are derived by Docket Nexus (methodology).