Clark v. Ace Rubber Products, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
McNAMEE, District Judge. '
Plaintiffs are the owners of patent 2,-436,139, which .was applied for April 6, 1946 and issued February 17, 1948. They bring this action for infringement. Defendants deny infringement and assert that the patent is invalid. They also allege that plaintiffs do not come into- this court of equity with clean hands and urge dismissal of the action on that ground.
The alleged invention consists of a unitary molded rubber mat designed to1 cover both the tread and riser portions of stairs or steps. Plaintiff James C. Clark is the inventor and owner of a two-thirds interest…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic Devices Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Richards v. Chase Elevator Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
- France Mfg. Co. v. Jefferson Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1939
- O'LEARY v. Liggett Drug Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1945
- Hartford-Empire Co. v. Swindell Bros.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1938
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ransburg Electro-Coating Corp. v. Nordson CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1968