Legal Opinion

Auto Spring Repairer Co. v. Grinberg

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Decided January 6, 1912PublishedCited by 3 opinions

In Equity. Suit by the Auto Spring Repairer Company against David Grinberg and Adolph Morris, sued as the Manhattan Storage Company, and Adolph Morris, doing business as the Manhattan Storage Company. On final hearing. Decree for defendants.

1Opinion of the Court

HAZED, District Judge.

This is an infringement suit relating to patent No. 899,468, granted September 22, 1908, to William R. Petze, for improvements in spring repairers, and by him assigned to complainant. The principal object of the patentee was to provide a device which could be readily applied to the springs of motor cars to reinforce them so> as to permit the car to continue its journey after a spring had been fractured or broken. The device in suit specifically consists of a bow-shaped tie-piece which is shorter than the spring and which can be connected to a break, either at the end or…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Moore v. MarshSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
  2. Kaolatype Engraving Co. v. HokeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1887
  3. Dueber Watch-Case Manuf'g Co. v. RobbinsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1896
  4. H. Tibbe & Son Manuf'g Co. v. HeinekenU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1889
  5. Rose v. HirshCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1896

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Sinko Tool & Mfg. Co. v. Casco Products CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1937
  2. Herman v. Detroit Shipbuilding Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1924
  3. T. H. Symington Co. v. National Malleable Castings Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1919

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API