Legal Opinion
Maytag Co. v. Hurley MacHine Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided May 22, 1939No. Nos. 76, 77, 661PublishedCited by 44 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Roberts
These are patent infringement suits in which certiorari was granted because of a conflict of decision. Apparatus claims 23, 26, and 29 of the Snyder patent, No. 1,866,779, which are here involved, have been held invalid in the Second Circuit by reason of anticipation; and have been adjudged valid in the Eighth Circuit. We need not resolve the conflict, since we are of opinion the patent is void for failure to disclaim claim 39.
The patent, issued July 12, 1932, to the Maytag Company as assignee, contains thirty-nine claims, thirty-six ' of which are for a washing machine and three (Nos. 1, 38…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Triplett v. LowellSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Ensten v. Simon, Ascher & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- General Electric Supply Corp. v. Maytag Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938
- Maytag Co. v. Brooklyn Edison Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1936
- Maytag Co. v. Easy Washing Mach. Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- Marconi Wireless Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company of America v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Hycon Manufacturing Company v. H. Koch & Sons, a Partnership Consisting of M. P. Koch, W. L. Koch, H. M. Koch and R. Koch AbelCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- Foxboro Co. v. Taylor Instrument CompaniesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
- Edwin L. Wiegand Co. v. Harold E. Trent Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.