Legal Opinion
Nachman Spring-Filled Corp. v. Kay Mfg. Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided July 15, 1935No. 465PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MANTON, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff sued for infringement of the Suekoff patent, No. 1,411,227, which was held valid and infringed. It also sued on the Suekoff patent, No. 1,352,157, which was held valid and infringed by defendant’s, tool, Exhibit 4, but not by its tools, Exhibits 5 and 6. Both plaintiff and defendant appeal.
Patent No. 1,411,227 was held valid by this court. Nachman Spring-Filled Corp. v. Spring Products Corp. (C. C. A.) 68 F.(2d) 829. Defendant’s appeal does not contest validity of this patent, but contends it is licensed to use the invention. Patent No. 1,352,157 relates to a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Radio Corporation v. Cable Radio Tube CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- General Electric Co. v. Continental Lamp Works, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- Troy Iron & Nail Factory v. CorningSupreme Court of the United States · 1853
- Nachman Spring-Filled Corp. v. Spring Products Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- United Printing Machinery Co. v. Cross Paper Feeder Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1915
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1972
- Western Electric Co. v. General Talking Pictures Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1936