Legal Opinion
Otis Elevator Co. v. Pacific Finance Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided January 23, 1934No. 6996PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MACK, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff, as assignee and owner of a patent No. 1,506,380 for an invention relating to a system and means for controlling electric elevators, obtained reissue No. 16,207, the patent in suit. Defendant Llewellyn Iron Works manufactured and installed in a building owned by defendant Pacific Finance Corporation a group of electric elevators, charged by plaintiff to infringe certain claims of the patent. The cause was referred to a master, who filed his report on February 25, 1930. He found five of the claims valid and infringed, one valid but not infringed and claim 37…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Russell v. PlaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- O'Reilly v. MorseSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- Carnegie Steel Co. v. Cambria Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Smith & Griggs Manufacturing Co. v. SpragueSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Leeds & Catlin Co. v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Pennington Engineering Co. v. Spicer Mfg. CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1947
- Oliver-Sherwood Co. v. Patterson-Ballagh CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
- Shingle Product Patents, Inc. v. GleasonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1954
- General Chemical Co. v. Standard Wholesale Phosphate & Acid Works, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
- Monsanto Chemical Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1944
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.