Legal Opinion

Electric Pipe Line, Inc. v. Fluid Systems, Incorporated

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided March 26, 1956No. 198, Docket 23786PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEDINA, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiff and defendant are competitors in the business of furnishing plans, drawings, parts and instructions for the installation of heating systems for schools, industrial plants, churches, public buildings and the like. As defendant claimed that plaintiff was a direct and contributory infringer of its Lines Patent No. 2,224,403, issued to Harold A. Lines of West Haven, Connecticut, on December 10, 1940, and had warned plaintiff and its customers that legal action would be instituted if unauthorized use was made of the patented system, plaintiff took the initiative and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mercoid Corp. v. Mid-Continent Investment Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. Great Lakes Equipment Company v. Fluid Systems, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1954

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Ling-Temco-Vought, Inc. v. Kollsman Instrument CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967
  2. Stearns v. Tinker & RasorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
  3. Metal Arts Company v. Fuller CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
  4. Electric Pipe Line, Inc. v. Fluid Systems, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
  5. Weyerhaeuser Timber Company v. Bostitch, Inc.District Court, D. Rhode Island · 1959

11 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