“Dateline: Detroit SAE Show News Bulletins Plastic body panels for tomorrow's cars, vans and trucks . . . ,” Plastics Technology, pp. 103-107 (Apr. 1986). |
General Motors Painted Products Specification 9984065 (1985) (2 pgs.). |
Chattha et al., “New Nonaqueous Dispersions for High Solids Base Coat/Clear Coat Paints,” J. Coatings Technol. 57:41-44 (1985). |
General Motors Painted Products Specification No. 9984052 (1982) (3 pgs.). |
Bongaerts et al., “Flat Film Extrusion Using Chill-Roll Casting,” In: Plastics Extrusion Technology, Hensen et al., eds., Hanser Publishers, New York, §§6.1-6.2 (1988). |
Modern Plastics Guide to Plastics, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, pp. 32-34 (1981). |
In the District Court of the United States for the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Divison, Rexan Industries Corp. v. Avery Dennison Corporation, Civil Action 3:94CV271-MCK, “Order” dated Jan. 19, 2001, 55 pages. |
European Opposition by Rexam Industries Corp. against European Patent No. EP 0352298 and attached exhibits. |
European Opposition by Rexam Industries Corp. against European Patent No. EP 0285071 and attached exhibits. |
Fuchs, SME Technical Paper No., FC 77-647, “A State of the Art—Evaluation of Hot Stamping Decorative Plastic,” dated 1977. |
Polymers Paint Colour Journal, Oct. 29, 1980, p. 796. “The Orientatin of Aluminum Pigments in Automotive Finishes,” Toyo Aluminum K.K. |
Automobiltechnische Zeitschrift, vol. 84, No. 5, May 1982. |
Chemical Week, Jul. 4, 1984, p. 30 “Automotive Coatings: Helping Detroit Woo Customers”. |
Anonymous, “Research Disclosure,” Jul. 1984. |
BP&R, Nov. 1985, pp. 29-30. |
Avery International Thermark, “The Driving Force in Laminates,” 1985. |
Plastics World, “Composite Structures: Next Wave in Detroit,” Miller, Nov. 1986, pp. 30-34. |
“Brilliant Performance,” Rexham Corporation, dated 1987. |
Plastics Engineering, “Solvent Cast Films,” May 1987, pp. 29-33. |
Affidavit of Dennis Northrop |
Affidavit of Victor H. Rampelberg and supporting exhibits. |
Japanese Opposition by Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co. against Japanese Patent Application No. 63-504355 and attached exhibits, Jul. 16, 1996. |
Japanese Opposition by Rexham Industries Corp. against Japanese Patent Application No. 63-504355 and attached exhibits, Jul. 16, 1996. |
Japanese Opposition by Nissha Printing Co., Ltd. against Japanese Patent Application No. 63-504355 and attached exhibits, May 16, 1996. |
Ullman et al., “Mechanical Properties of Blends of Poly(methyl methacrylate) and Poly(vinylidene fluoride),” Composites Science and Technology 23:91-112 (1985). |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—Rexam's Motion No. 1 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—Memorandum of Law in Support of Rexam's Motion No. 1 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—Rexam's Motion No. 2 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—Memorandum of Law in Support of Rexam's Motion No. 2 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—Rexam's Motion No. 3 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—Memorandum of Law in Support of Rexam's Motion No. 3 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—Joint Appendix Supporting Rexam's Motion Nos. 1, 2 and 3 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery (vol. I of II). |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—Joint Appendix Supporting Rexam's Motion Nos. 1, 2 and 3 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery (vol. II of II). |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-McK—Avery's Statement of Disputed Facts in Support of Avery's Oppositions to Rexam's Motion 1 and 2. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-McK—“Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Rexam's Motion 1 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery”. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-McK—“Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Rexam's Motion 2 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery”. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-McK—“Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Rexam's Motion 3 for Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery”. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-McK—“Avery's Appendix of Documents in Opposition to Rexam's Summary Judgment Motions”. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—“Rexam's Reply in Support of Its Motion No. 1 For Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery”. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—“Rexam's Reply in Support of Its Motion No. 2 For Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery”. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—“Rexam's Reply in Support of Its Motion No. 3 For Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery”. |
In the United States District Court, for the Western District of North Carolina, Rexam Industries v. Avery Dennison, Civil Action 3:94cv271-MU—“Supplemental Joint Appendix Supporting Rexam's Motion No. 1, 2 and 3 For Partial Summary Judgment Against Avery”. |