Intex Plastics Sales Co. v. United National Insurance

Good Law
23 F.3d 254·1994 WL 158017
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 2, 1994Nos. 91-55276, 91-55330California1,497 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rymer, J.

Opinion by Judge RYMER.

United National Insurance Company, New England Reinsurance Company, and First State Insurance Company appeal the grant of summary judgment in favor of Intex Plasties Sales Company. The district court held that all three insurers had a duty to defend Intex in a patent infringement suit under the insurers’ Comprehensive General Liability (CGL) Policies which cover “advertising injury.” We must decide whether there is a duty to defend a suit for patent infringement under a policy that covers “advertising injury,” including “piracy.” We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we hold that there is no duty to defend.

I

Intex is a California corporation which, since 1982, has manufactured and sold waterbed mattresses and products. Each of the insurers issued Intex a CGL Policy that covered “advertising injury.” The policies state:

(Emphasis added.) New England Reinsurance Company’s policy covered August 1, 1981 to August 1, 1982; First State Insurance Company’s policy covered August 1, 1982 to August 1,1988; and United National Insurance Company’s policy covered February 1, 1984 to August 1, 1984.

Intex argues that these policies cover a counterclaim…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.