Legal Opinion
Corn Products Refining Co. v. Penick & Ford, Ltd.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided December 6, 1932No. 4691PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WILKERSON, District Judge.
Plaintiff (appellee here) charged infringement of Widmer patent, No. 1,585,452, for the manufacture of starch. Defendant by counterclaim charged infringement of McCoy patent, No. 1,651,611, for a closed or “bottled-up” wet starch system. The District Court found infringement of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 13, 14, and 18 of the Widmer patent and dismissed the counterclaim on the issue of validity.
The patents in suit are in the field of starch manufacture by the wet method. By this method stareh-bearing material, such as com, after being ground, is subjected to operations…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Carnegie Steel Co. v. Cambria Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Smith v. NicholsSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Cimiotti Unhairing Co. v. American Fur Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Dunbar v. MyersSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Holland Furniture Co. v. Perkins Glue Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Texas Co. v. Globe Oil & Refining Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1953
- Central Truck Lines, Inc. v. Mrs. Doris Lott, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Jack Lott, DeceasedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1957
- Fruehauf Trailer Co. v. Highway Trailer Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1933
- American Lakes Paper Co. v. Nekoosa-Edwards Paper Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1936
- Bert Strand, Sheriff of San Diego County, State of California v. William SchmittrothCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956