Dennison Manufacturing Co. v. Panduit Corp.
475 U.S. 809 · Decided April 21, 1986 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Dennison Manufacturing Co. v. Panduit Corp. was decided on April 21, 1986 by a vote of 8–1. The Court vacated the lower court's decision and remanded the case. The decision was issued per curiam (an unsigned opinion of the Court). SCDB classifies its main issue as “Patents” in the Economic Activity area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 475 U.S. 809 · 106 S. Ct. 1578 · 89 L. Ed. 2d 817 · 1986 U.S. LEXIS 100
- Docket number
- 85-1150
- Decided
- April 21, 1986
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Per curiam (no oral argument)
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 8–1
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Patents
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Federal Rules of Civil or Appellate Procedure
- Type of law
- Court rules
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Jurisdictional dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority |
Full case caption
Dennison Manufacturing Co. v. Panduit Corp.
SCDB identifiers: case 1985-068, docket 1985-068-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Patents”
- General Motors Corp. v. Devex Corp.
- Eli Lilly and Company v. Medtronic, Inc.
- Dawson Chemical Co. v. Rohm & Haas Co.
- Diamond v. Chakrabarty
- Asgrow Seed Company v. Denny Winterboer and Becky Winterboer
- Sakraida v. Ag Pro, Inc.
Cases on the same legal provision: Federal Rules of Civil or Appellate Procedure
- Icicle Seafoods, Inc. v. Worthington
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., LTD v. Zenith Radio Corp.
- Schiavone v. Fortune
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
- Acosta v. Louisiana Department of Health and Human Resources
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc.
- Cleavinger v. Saxner
- Midlantic National Bank v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
- Fisher v. City of Berkeley
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., LTD v. Zenith Radio Corp.
- Square D Co. v. Niagara Frontier Tariff Bureau, Inc.
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error