Legal Opinion
I. T. S. Rubber Co. v. United Lace & Braid Mfg. Co.
District Court, D. Rhode Island
Decided June 11, 1920No. 111PublishedCited by 3 opinions
In Equity. Suit by the I. T. S. Rubber Company against the United Lace & Braid Manufacturing Company.
1Opinion of the Court
BROWN, District Judge.
The hill charges infringement of reissued letters patent No. 14,049, January 11, 1916, to John G. Tufford, for “resilient heel.” Claims 5, 6, and 7 are in issue:.
“5. A heel lift of substantially nonmetallic resilient material having its body portion of concavo-convex form on every line of cross-section, the concave upper face lying entirely below a piano passing through the rear upper edge and the breast corners of the lift.
“6. A heel lift of substantially resilient material having its body portion of concavo-convex form on every line of cross-section, the concave upper…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Winans v. DenmeadSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- Reece Button-Hole Ma. Co. v. Globe Button-Hole Ma. Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1894
- Fetzer & Spies Leather Co. v. I. T. S. Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1919
- I. T. S. Rubber Co. v. Panther Rubber Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1919
- United States Rubber Co. v. I. T. S. Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1919
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- I. T. S. Rubber Co. v. Essex Rubber Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1920
- Tee Pee Rubber Co. v. I. T. S. Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1920
- I. T. S. Rubber Co. v. United States Rubber Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1922