Buckeye Incubator Co. v. Blum
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Per curiam
The court below (17 F.[2d] 456) held that the defendant there (appellee here) did not infringe the Smith patent, No. 1,262,860, issued April 16,1918, for an incubator. The patent and its scope were discussed by this court in Wolff v. Buckeye Co., 296 F. 680, and in Buckeye Co. v. Petersime, 19 F.(2d) 721. They have been considered in other circuits in the cases mentioned in the note.1 Further discussion of the main features is not now necessary.
Counsel for appellant frankly concede that there should be an affirmance, unless we are prepared to modify to some extent our holding in the Petersime…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wolf v. Buckeye Incubator Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1924
- Buckeye Incubator Co. v. CooleyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1927
- Buckeye Incubator Co. v. PetersimeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1927
- Buckeye Incubator Co. v. HillpotCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1928
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cugley v. Bundy Incubator Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1937
- Miller Hatcheries, Inc. v. Buckeye Incubator Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1930
- McKay Co. v. Shott Mfg. Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1937
- Robbins v. Ira M. Petersime & SonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1931
- Buckeye Incubator Co. v. BolingCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.