Legal Opinion

Blastcrete Equipment Co. v. RIDLEY AND CO.

District Court, S.D. California

Decided June 22, 1959No. 20821PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

YANKWICH, District Judge.

The second amended complaint on which the case was tried charged patent infringement and unfair competition. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1400(b). At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s argument I expressed the view that there was no proof of unfair competition by misappropriation of trade secrets or otherwise. A further study of the matter reenforces, me in the view.

I

No Unfair Competition

In this case I. M. Ridley, late in 1951 and early in 1952, assigned his invention-contained in Letters Patent 2,569,952, issued to him on October 2, 1951, and 2,594,072, issued to him on April 22,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  2. Scott Paper Co. v. Marcalus Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
  3. Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. Formica Insulation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
  4. Edward Katzinger Co. v. Chicago Metallic Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
  5. Sarkes Tarzian, Inc. v. Audio Devices, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 1958

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cold Metal Process Co. v. Aluminum Co.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1961
  2. Fortner & Perrin, Inc. v. PerrinDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API