Legal Opinion
Ensten v. Simon, Ascher & Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided February 3, 1930No. 242PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Per curiam
(after stating the facts as above).
The question is whether a patentee, to save the life of his patent, when one claim thereof has been held invalid by an interlocutory decree, must either appeal from such decree, or promptly file a disclaimer. With respect to this very patent, Judge Westenhaver held that he must. Ensten v. Rich-Sampliner Co. (D. C.) 13 F.(2d) 132. But this was reversed on another point, and the disclaimer question called moot, in 19 F.(2d) 66 (C. C. A. 6). In the ease at bar, the court below followed the reasoning of Judge Westenhaver.
The appellants contend that election…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- R. Hoe & Co. v. Goss Printing Press Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- R. Hoe & Co. v. Goss Printing Press Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Ensten v. Rich-Sampliner Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1926
- Excelsior Steel Furnace Co. v. F. Meyer & Bro. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1929
- Excelsior Steel Furnace Co. v. F. Meyer & Bro. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1917
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bassick Mfg. Co. v. Adams Grease Gun CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
- Otis Elevator Co. v. Pacific Finance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1934
- General Chemical Co. v. Standard Wholesale Phosphate & Acid Works, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
- Clair v. Kastar, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Lowell v. TriplettCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.