wrongful interference with business relations by Colt Industries
and requesting actual and punitive damages (Count II). Colt
Industries denied violations and asserted numerous counterclaims
and affirmative defenses. Plaintiffs denied Colt Industries'
counterclaims and asserted affirmative defenses. Patent
infringement is not an issue in this case. This court has
jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and the
parties before it under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and 15 U.S.C. § 4, 15
and 26. Venue in this district is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)
and (c) and 15 U.S.C. § 15.
Based on the motion papers and accompanying briefs and the
representations of counsel at a hearing, all matters alleged in
plaintiffs' complaint and those matters in defendant's
counterclaims raised in the motion papers were considered by the
court to be placed before it for ruling, and therefore the court
has considered and has duly ruled upon the same as a matter of
summary judgment upon undisputed material facts.
This court's decision is based upon the pleadings, the
depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file,
together with the affidavits and other evidence presented, the
briefs, arguments, and this court's interrogation of counsel at
a hearing. Among the material considered was live testimony
before this court in Colt Industries v. Springfield Armory, Inc.,
et al., Civil Docket No. 83-4072, with which this cause was
heretofore consolidated. That testimony was identified by the
transcript portions provided as exhibits to the instant motion.
This court has determined that summary judgment is appropriate
as indicated in this court's Memorandum Decision and Order
entered on May 24, 1985, 609 F. Supp. 1174 which Memorandum is
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. There having been injury to plaintiffs' business and
property, a trial shall be held, as subsequently scheduled by
this court, to determine the amount and types of damages to which
plaintiffs may be entitled, and such other matters as may remain
to be resolved by trial.
2. A hearing shall be held after such trial to determine the
amount of attorneys' fees and interest and costs to which
plaintiffs may be entitled.
3. The disclosures made in Colt's M-16 patents are insufficient
to satisfy either the enablement or best mode requirements of
35 U.S.C. § 112. Accordingly, the following patents were invalid
from their inception:
3,236,155; 3,292,492; 3,301,133; 3,336,011;
3,440,751; 3,453,762; 3,619,929; 3,771,415;
4. In view of Colt Industries' wrongful retention as its trade
secrets of information that it should have disclosed, under
35 U.S.C. § 112, 1st paragraph, in its M-16 patents, so that others
could have made and used the M-16 inventions for use with the
M-16 (all references herein to M-16 are intended to include its
various versions such as the M-16A1 and the M-16A2, where the
context permits), such information is hereby declared void and
unenforceable as trade secrets. Colt Industries' monopolization
of the M-16 market and sub-markets and agreements in restraint of
trade in connection with its suppliers and distributors require
injunctive relief for an adequate remedy.