Legal Opinion
Consolidated Car Heating Co. v. Chrome-Gold Alloys Corp.
District Court, N.D. New York
Decided December 2, 1952No. Civ. No. 3841PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BRENNAN, Chief Judge.
This is the usual patent infringement action with the usual prayer for relief.
The answer denies the validity and infringement of the patent in suit. The answer of Chrome-Gold Alloys Sales, Inc., also alleges as a counterclaim a cause of action against the plaintiff based upon unfair competition, which is denied in plaintiff’s reply. No evidence was offered on the trial to support the allegations of the counterclaim. It is deemed abandoned and is dismissed for failure of proof.
The plaintiff is a corporation having an office for the transaction of business at Albany, New…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Radio Corp. of America v. Radio Engineering Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Carson v. American Smelting & Refining Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925
- Dewey & Almy Chemical Co. v. Mimex Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Foxboro Co. v. Taylor Instrument CompaniesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Stamicarbon, N v. V. Escambia Chemical CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- Ansul Company v. Uniroyal, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969
- Curtiss-Wright Corporation v. Link Aviation, Inc.District Court, N.D. New York · 1959
- Bede v. ArvintzDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1959