Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. Triumph Electric Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court dismissing the bill of the Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Company against the Triumph Electric Company, seeking to enjoin the alleged infringement of a design patent (No. 21,416) issued March 22, 1892, to Albert Schmid, and assigned by Schmid to the complainant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court dismissing the bill of the Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Company against the Triumph Electric Company, seeking to enjoin the alleged infringement of a design patent (No. 21,416) issued March 22, 1892, to Albert Schmid, and assigned by Schmid to the complainant. The patent was for a design of a new and useful configuration of a frame for electric machines. The frame is seen in Eigs. 1 and 2 of the patent: The patent says: “The leading feature of the…
1Opinion of the CourtTaft, Circuit Judge
(after stating tbe facts). Section 4929 oí the Devised Statutes provides Hint:
“Any person who by his own Industry, genius, efforts and expense, has invented and produced (1) any new and original design for a manufacture, bust, statue, alto-relievo or has relief; (2) any new and original design for the printing of woolen, silk, cotton or oilier fabrics; (S) any new a.nd original impression, ornament, pattern, print or picture to be printed, painted, cast or otherwise placed on or worked into any article of manufacture; (4) or any new, useful and original shape or configuration, of any article…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gorham Co. v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Smith v. Whitman Saddle Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Foster v. CrossinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1890
- Northrup v. AdamsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1877
- Kraus v. FitzpatrickU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1888
3Cited by6 opinions
- Charles Boldt Co. v. Nivison-Weiskopf Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1912
- Williams Calk Co. v. Neverslip Mfg. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Middle Pennsylvania · 1905
- Bradley v. EcclesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1903
- Pashek v. Dunlop Tyre & Rubber Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1925
- Aluminum Goods Mfg. Co. v. Buckeye Aluminum Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1923
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.