Legal Opinion
Jensen-Salsbery Laboratories, Inc. v. O. M. Franklin Blackleg Serum Co.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided December 6, 1934No. 1013PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge.
A rehearing was granted herein limited to two questions: Is the patent valid, and does Jensen-Salsbery “treat the resulting product” in the sense this phrase is used in the claims.
The essential facts are stated in our former opinion. See Jensen-Salsbery Lab. Co. v. O. M. Franklin Blackleg S. Co. (C. C. A. 10) 72 F.(2d)15.
At the rehearing counsel for Franklin Company contended that the last phrase in claims 1 to 8, inclusive, which is identical in each 1 and reads: “And treating the resulting product to obtain the organism in suitable form for immunizing use,” means the…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- O'Reilly v. MorseSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- National Hollow Brake-Beam Co. v. Interchangeable Brake-Beam Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Merrill v. YeomansSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Permutit Co. v. Graver Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Clark v. State Street Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cities Service Oil Co. v. Geolograph Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1953
- Scott & Williams, Inc. v. WhisnantCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1942
- Callison v. PickensCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1935
- Midland Valley R. v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1939
- Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Hercules Powder Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1954
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.