Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Hesser
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
SIMONS, Circuit Judge.
The appellant sued for contributory patent infringement, but its petition was dismissed on the ground that the accused sales by the appellee were for purposes of replacement or repair of the patented structures and so did not constitute infringement under the rule of Wilson v. Simpson, 9 How. 109, 13 L.Ed. 66; Keeler v. Standard Folding-Bed Co., 157 U.S. 659, 15 S.Ct. 738, 39 L.Ed. 848; Automotive Parts Co. v. Wisconsin Axle Co., 6 Cir., 81 F.2d 125. No issue of validity is involved and our problem is simply to determine whether the sales were of such nature, either in…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Leeds & Catlin Co. v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Leeds & Catlin Company v. Victor Talking Machine Company (No. 2)Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Wilson v. SimpsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Keeler v. Standard Folding Bed Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Automotive Parts Co. v. Wisconsin Axle Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1935
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Fromberg, Inc. v. Gross Manufacturing Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
- Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961