Legal Opinion
Automated Building Components, Inc. v. Hydro-Air Engineering, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Missouri
Decided December 14, 1964No. 61 C 160(3)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REGAN, District Judge.
This action was instituted on May 11, 1961, by plaintiff, Gang-Nails Sales Co., Inc. Subsequently, Automated Building Components, Inc., was substituted as plaintiff herein. There is no question in the case at bar that the substituted plaintiff is the assignee of the entire interest of U. S. Letters Patent No. 2,-877,520 hereinafter referred to as the Jureit Patent. Plaintiff seeks an adjudication that Claims 1, 3, and 4 of the Jureit Patent are valid and have been infringed by the defendant. By admission Claim 2 of the Jureit Patent is not in issue at the case at bar. It…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- The Flintkote Company, a Corporation v. Elmer Lysfjord and Walter R. Waldron, Doing Business as Aabeta Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
- Kobe, Inc. v. Dempsey Pump Co. Dempsey Pump Co. v. Kobe, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1952
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Farmhand, Inc. v. Russell O. Craven, D/B/A Craven Welding Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1972
- Maloney-Crawford Tank Corp. v. Sauder Tank Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1972
- Maloney-Crawford Tank Corporation and the Fish Investment Corporation v. Sauder Tank Company, Inc., Maloney-Crawford Tank Corporation and the Fish Investment Corporation v. Sauder Tank Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1972