Legal Opinion
Newcomb, David Co. v. R. C. Mahon Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided June 27, 1932No. 5984PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HICKENLOOPER, Circuit Judge.
The District Court held claims 11 and 32 of patent to Russell C. Mahon, No. 1,641,181, for a pneumatic conveyor, to be valid and to have been infringed by appellant. It will be sufficient to quote but one of these claims. This appeal followed.
At the time of the application for the patent in suit, pneumatie conveyors for sawdust and' shavings, and even heavier materials, were already old in the art. When used in connection with the operation of a number of separate machines in a woodworking plant, it was necessary that the conveyor have a series of branch conduits…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Concrete Appliances Co. v. GomerySupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Sachs v. Hartford Electric Supply Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
- Adams v. Galion Iron Works & Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
- Bettendorf Co. v. Ohio Steel Foundry Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1932
- Reynolds Spring Co. v. L. A. Young Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Wood v. Peerless Motor Car CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1935
- Fruehauf Trailer Co. v. Highway Trailer Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1933
- Remington Rand v. Master-Craft CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1933
- Patent & Licensing Corp. v. Weaver-Wall Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1938
- John T. Riddell, Inc. v. P. Goldsmith Sons Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1937
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.