United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
98-1380,-1447,-1472,-1534
DIVERSEY LEVER, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ECOLAB, INC.,
Defendant-Appellant.
Stephen B. Judlowe, Hopgood, Calimafde, Kalil & Judlowe, LLP, of New York, New York,
argued for plaintiff-appellee. With him on the brief were Ira B. Winkler, and Adam T. Bernstein.
Also on the brief was Robert A. Dunn, Dinnin & Dunn, P.C., of Troy, Michigan.
Frank P. Porcelli, Fish & Richardson, of Boston, Massachusetts, argued for defendant-appellant.
On the brief were Douglas J. Williams, Mark D. Schuman, J. Derek Vandenburgh, and Daniel M.
Pauly, Merchant, Gould, Smith, Edell, Welter & Schmidt, P.A., of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Of
counsel were Thomas N. Young, and Thomas E. Bejin, Young & Basile, of Troy, Michigan.
Appealed from: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Senior Judge George E. Woods
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
98-1380,-1447,-1472,-1534
DIVERSEY LEVER, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ECOLAB, INC.,
Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________
DECIDED: September 10, 1999
__________________________
Before MAYER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN and SCHALL, Circuit Judges.
MAYER, Chief Judge.
Ecolab, Inc. ("Ecolab") appeals the judgment of the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Michigan, No. 96-CV-73112, which granted Diversey Lever, Inc. ("Diversey
Lever") summary judgment that Ecolab infringed U.S. Patent Nos. 5,009,801 ("the '801 patent")
and 5,073,280 ("the '280 patent"). Because the district court properly interpreted the parties'
settlement agreement, we affirm.
Background
In 1991, Diversey Lever's predecessors, Diversey Corporation and Diversey Corp.
(collectively "Diversey"), brought a patent infringement suit against Ecolab alleging that Ecolab's
PET GUARD lubricant for bottling conveyors infringed Diversey's '801 and '280 patents. Both
patents are directed to methods of inhibiting stress cracking in the plastic (polyethylene
terephthalate, or "PET") bottles used