Legal Opinion

Container Company v. Carpenter Container Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided March 25, 1952No. 10567PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

This is an appeal from a declaratory judgment holding defendant’s patent invalid. Judge Rodney in his excellent opinion in the District Court, 99 F.Supp. 167, found as a fact that the essential elements of appellant’s combinations were all included in the prior art and that those combinations do not demonstrate the degree of novelty necessary to constitute patentable invention over the prior art. Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic Devices Corp., 314 U.S. 84, 91, 62 S.Ct. 37, 86 L.Ed. 58; Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp., 340 U.S. 147, 71 S.Ct. 127, 95 L.Ed.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
  2. Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic Devices Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
  3. Container Co. v. Carpenter Container Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1951
  4. Boston Metals Co. v. Air Products Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1952

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hartford National Bank & Trust Co. v. E. F. Drew & Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API