Legal Opinion

Deitel v. Unique Specialty Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided December 7, 1931No. 75PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

We held this patent valid in Deitel v. Cohen, 40 F.(2d) 263, and this suit was brought against another infringer. We refer to our opinion for a statement of the general nature of the invention and for a discussion of the claims, in all three of which one element is the same with immaterial variants. The first will serve as illustration: “A separate channel member clamping said facing and said bottom cover plate to said flanges and a separate channel member clamping said facing and said top cover plate to the edges of said flat open frame.” The supposed infringement is within the claims,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Claude Neon Lights, Inc. v. E. MacHlett & SonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
  2. Nieblo Mfg. Co. v. PrestonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
  3. Deitel v. CohenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Reeves Brothers, Inc. v. US Laminating Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1968
  2. Leesona Corporation v. Varta Batteries, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1981
  3. International Latex Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant-Respondent v. Warner Brothers Company, Defendant-Respondent-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1960
  4. Carter Products, Inc. v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1958
  5. International Cellucotton Products Co. v. Sterilek Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1938

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

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

Powered by the Exa API