Legal Opinion
Hazeltine Corporation v. Radio Corporation of America
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 14, 1931PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WOOLSEY, District Judge.
I hold that claims Nos. 1, 2, 5, 9, 11, 12, 14, and 16 of United States patent No. 1,- 533,858, the Plate Circuit Neutralization patent, are valid and have been infringed by-the defendant.
I hold that claims Nos. 1, 2, 3, 14, 15, 17, 18, and 21 of United States patent No. 1,-648,808, the Conductance Ratio patent, are invalid for want of invention.
As each party has prevailed on one of the patents in suit, costs will not be granted to either party.
I. This is a suit under the patent law; consequently the jurisdiction of this court is obvious. There are not any questions…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Atlantic Works v. BradySupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Corona Cord Tire Co. v. Dovan Chemical Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Merrill v. YeomansSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- James v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Hazeltine Corporation v. Radio CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1937
- Penmac Corporation v. Esterbrook Steel Pen Mfg. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Stelos Co. v. Hosiery Motor-Mend CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1932
- Johnson Laboratories, Inc. v. Meissner Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1938
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. TorrDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1938
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.