Legal Opinion

Winget Kickernick Co. v. Silo-Ette Underwear Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided April 19, 1937No. 316PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

L. HAND, Circuit Judge.

This case arises on an appeal by the defendant from a decree upon the usual bill in equity for the infringement of claims 1, 2, and 5 of patent No. 1,389,067, and of claims 1 and 4 of reissue patent No. 17,903. In Winget Kickernick Company v. Kenil-worth Mfg. Co., 11 F.(2d) 1, we held the same claims of the first patent valid and infringed, and for the purposes of this appeal we shall again assume that they are valid. The invention is for improvements in women’s drawers, and claim one — which will serve for all three — is as follows: “A woman’s undergarment comprising a…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Winget Kickernick Co. v. Kenilworth Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Baldwin Rubber Co. v. Paine & Williams Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1939
  2. De Cew v. Union Bag & Paper Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1945
  3. Angle v. RichardsonDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API