Sandvik Aktiebolag v. E.J. Co.¶
(1997). Sandvik Aktiebolag v. E.J. Co.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Doctrine of Repair and Reconstruction
- Considering all facts and rejecting a bright-line rule, the court held that the process reconstructed a spent device
This sourceCir. 1997). Supplies Sandvik's totality-of-the-circumstances holding that retipping a spent, non-resharpenable drill by brazing on new carbide and remachining the patented cutting geometry is reconstruction, not repair.
SupportedVerified against the source
- Considering all facts and rejecting a bright-line rule, the court held that the process reconstructed a spent device
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:8f445b878bf1 · see in the full table