Legal Opinion
United Chromium v. General Motors Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided September 21, 1936No. 436PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MANTON, Circuit Judge.
This suit is for infringement of patent No. 1,581,188, application filed December 19, 1925, and granted April 20, 1926, to Fink for a process of electrodepositing chromium and of preparing baths therefor. We considered this patent heretofore and held it valid and infringed as to claims 1-6, 10-13, 15, 16, and 18. United Chromium, Inc. v. International Silver Co. (C.C.A.) 60 F.(2d) 913, 915. The claims here in suit are Nos. 4, 6, 10, 13, 16, and 18. 1
In our former opinion we held that the novelty of the Fink invention lay in the composition of the bath for…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Egbert v. LippmannSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- United Chromium, Inc. v. International Silver Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
- Stelos Co. v. Hosiery Motor-Mend CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- Smith v. HallCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1936
3Cited by11 opinions
- Esme E. Rosaire v. Baroid Sales Division, National Lead CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
- Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. Lever Bros. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1937
- In re SchlittlerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956
- Martin Dwyer v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
- EJ Brooks Co. v. Stoffel Seals CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1958
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.