Peter T. Coffield & Son v. Spears & Riddle
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern West Virginia
In Equity. On final hearing. This suit is based upon alleged infringement of reissued letters patent to Peter T. Coffield, No.” 12,719, applied for July 28, 1906, granted November 12, 1907, the original patent, No. 806,779, having issued to Coffield December 12, 1905. The assignments of both the reissued and original patents by Coffield to the complainants are not controverted.
Read the full summary
In Equity. On final hearing. This suit is based upon alleged infringement of reissued letters patent to Peter T. Coffield, No.” 12,719, applied for July 28, 1906, granted November 12, 1907, the original patent, No. 806,779, having issued to Coffield December 12, 1905. The assignments of both the reissued and original patents by Coffield to the complainants are not controverted. The defenses to the suit are, substantially, (1) lack of infringement and (2) invalidity of the reissue, in that (a) the application for the original patent was unlawfully amended by the introduction of new matter not…
1Opinion of the CourtDayton, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). Unusual as the statement may be in cases of this character, it does not seem to me that this controversy involves any great degree of difficulty in its determination. So far as the question of infringement is concerned, it is very clear that the motors manufactured by defendants are identical with those manufactured by complainants under their reissued patent, except that defendants have substituted flat or leaf springs attached to the cylinder heads for the coil ones carried on the stems of the exhaust and inlet valves in complainants’ motors. The thing to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Seymour v. OsborneSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Elizabeth v. Pavement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
- MacHine Co. v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Topliff v. TopliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Morley Sewing MacHine Co. v. LancasterSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hoeltke v. C. M. Kemp Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1936
- Frick Co. v. LindsayCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1928
- Wine Ry. Appliance Co. v. Baltimore & OR Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
- Wayne Mfg. Co. v. Coffield Motor Washer Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1915
- Coffield Motor Washer Co. v. A. D. Howe Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern West Virginia · 1909
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.