Legal Opinion
Hazeltine Corporation v. AH Grebe & Co.
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided June 20, 1927PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MOSCOWITZ, District Judge.
These two actions, brought by plaintiffs, Hazeltine Corporation (the owner of the patents) and Independent Radio Manufacturers, Inc. (the exclusive licensee), charge defendant, A. H. Grebe & Co., Inc., with -inf ringement of the Hazeltine neutrodyne patents, No. 1,489,228, granted April 1, 1924, and No. 1,533,858, granted April 14,1925.
Plaintiffs charge that the so-called “synchrophase” radio receiver, manufactured and sold by defendant since July, 1924, embodies the Hazeltine neutrodyne invention, and is an infringement of claim 1 of patent No. 1,-489,228, and of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Diamond Rubber Co. of New York v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Elmira & H. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1896
- Hazeltine Corp. v. Electric Service Engineering Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1926
- Benthall Mach. Co. v. National Mach. Corp.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1915
- Western Electric Co. v. Millheim Electric Tel. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania · 1898
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- In re RogoffCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
- Robins v. WettlauferCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
- Moss v. Patterson-Ballagh Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 1950
- Jones v. Freed-Eisemann Radio Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1929
- Matter of the Application of Julian RogoffCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.