Legal Opinion
Metropolitan Device Corp. v. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided December 6, 1929No. 5132PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HICKS, Circuit Judge.
Suit for infringement of claims Nos. 3 and 4 1 of Tor chio Patent No. 1,172,322, granted February 22, 1916, for a protective device for eleetrie cable joints. The defenses were: (1) Lack of invention; (2) anticipation; and (3) noninfringement. The bill was dismissed for lack of invention. The court disregarded a disclaimer 2 filed four days before the trial. We think it should have been permitted. That portion of the disclaimer disapproved is as follows: “ * * * And except as to insulating liquid which is fluid at ordinary working temperatures of such cables and in…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Loom Co. v. HigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Carnegie Steel Co. v. Cambria Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Sessions v. RomadkaSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Permutit Co. v. WadhamCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1926
- Ferro Concrete Const. Co. v. Concrete Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1913
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Payne Furnace & Supply Co. v. Williams-Wallace Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1941
- Harman v. ScottDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1950
- Lowell v. TriplettCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
- O. M. I. Corp. v. Kelsh Instrument Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1959
- American Stainless Steel Co. v. Rustless Iron Corp. of AmericaDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1933
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.