Legal Opinion
Powerlock Floors, Inc. v. Robbins Flooring Co.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided February 26, 1968No. Civ. A. No. 3262PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
STEEL, District Judge.
Plaintiff has sued defendant for the infringement of U. S. Letters Patent No. 3,267,630 (“630”) issued to plaintiff’s president, Omholt, on August 23, 1966 and U. S. Letters Patent No. 3,271,916 (“916”) issued to Omholt on September 13, 1966. Defendant has moved for summary judgment upon the ground that both patents are invalid.
The motion, in so far as it relates to the 630 patent, is based upon the defense of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (1952).1 As to the 916 patent, the motion is based upon an alleged failure of the specifications to meet the demands of 35…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Engl v. ætna Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Permutit Co. v. Graver Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Schriber-Schroth Co. v. Cleveland Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Vermont Structural Slate Company, Inc. v. Tatko Brothers Slate Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- The Borden Company v. Clearfield Cheese Co., Inc., a Pennsylvania CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Catanzaro v. Masco Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1976
- Kinek v. Gulf & Western, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1989
- Freeman v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1987
- Lyle/Carlstrom Associates, Inc. v. Manhattan Store Interiors, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1986
- Powerlock Floors, Inc. v. Robbins Flooring Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.