Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. The Bishop and Babcock Manufacturing Company, the Bishop and Babcock Manufacturing Company v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.

This is the second controversy that has come to this court for adjudication appertaining to Mayo Patent, No. 2,322,-041, for a combination automobile heater and windshield defroster.

On appeal to our court from a declaratory judgment, we held that Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Mayo patent were valid and infringed and that Claim 6 was invalid because too broad. Excel Auto Radiator Co. v. Bishop and Babcock Manufacturing Co., 6 Cir., 167 F.2d 962 certiorari denied 335 U.S. 823, 69 S.Ct. 46, 93 L.Ed. 377. Our opinion pointed out that, although it was old to heat the passenger…