Legal Opinion

Consolidated Bunging Apparatus Co. v. Woerle

United States Circuit Court

Decided January 4, 1887PublishedCited by 9 opinions

In Equity.

1Opinion of the CourtBlodgett, J.

The bill in this case charges infringement of patent No. 222,975, granted December 23, 1879, to Otto Zwietusch and Edward Heitman, (Zweitusch being assignee of Heitman,) for an “improvement in automatic pressure relief apparatus for beer vessels.” The object and scope of the invention, as set out in the specifications, is said to be “to provide an automatic pressure relief valve, adapted to be used on fermenting casks containing beer and like material, which will not foul, and whereby the automatic action of the valve is made more certain; and our invention consists—First, in a pressure…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bates v. CoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. United States v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1879

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. De Laski & Thropp Circular Woven Tire Co. v. William R. Thropp & Sons Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1914
  2. Consolidated Bunging Apparatus Co. v. Metropolitan Brewing Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1894
  3. Von Schmidt v. BowersCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1897
  4. McKinnon Chain Co. v. American Chain Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1920
  5. Selectasine Patents Co. v. Prest-O-Graph Co.District Court, D. Oregon · 1920

4 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