Legal Opinion

Concrete Mixing & Conveying Co. v. Powers-Kennedy Contracting Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided July 17, 1928No. 131PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SWAN, Circuit Judge.

These same claims were held valid and infringed by the same District Judge in Concrete Mixing & Conveying Co. v. Ulen Contracting Corp., 12 F.(2d) 929. We affirmed that decree without opinion. 12 F, (2d) 931. A detailed description of the patent in suit need not be here repeated. Subsequently Judge Bourquin held the patent invalid in Concrete Mixing & Conveying Co. v. R. C. Storrie & Co. (D. C.) 23 F.(2d) 131. It is urged that, because of his decision and the case of Concrete Appliance Co. v. Gomery, 269 U. S. 177, 46 S. Ct. 42, 70 L. Ed. 222, as well as because of new…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Deering v. Winona Harvester WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Concrete Appliances Co. v. GomerySupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  3. Crier v. InnesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1909
  4. Cortelyou v. Charles E. Johnson & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1906
  5. International Cork Co. v. New Process Cork Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Metallizing Engineering Co. v. Kenyon Bearing & Auto Parts Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1945
  2. Concrete Mixing & Conveying Co. v. R. C. Storrie & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1928
  3. (PC) Holston v. Viera RosaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
  4. (PC) Pangborn v. CDCRDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
  5. Saterstad v. State of NevadaDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2019

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

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

Powered by the Exa API