Legal Opinion
Nachman Spring-Filled Corp. v. Spring Products Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided January 22, 1934No. 161PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MANTON, Circuit Judge.
The patent in suit, No. 1,411,227, for a spring cushion construction, has two claims, both charged to be infringed. It has had great commercial success because it is cheaper and better for use than prior constructions. It was held valid below but not infringed.
The novelty claimed for it is that it embodies a complete permanently assembled spring casing containing complete individual *830pockets each wall of which is composed of a single thickness of fabric. Each row of spring pockets is so constructed as to admit of the subsequent contemporaneous insertion therein of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sanitary Refrigerator Co. v. WintersSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Winans v. DenmeadSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- Line Material Co. v. Brady Electric Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- Nathan v. HowardCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1906
- Telescope Cot Bed Co. v. Gold Medal Camp Furniture Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1916
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- B. B. Chemical Co. v. EllisCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1941
- B. B. Chemical Co. v. EllisDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1940
- Consolidated Car Heating Co. v. Chrome-Gold Alloys Corp.District Court, N.D. New York · 1952
- Nachman Spring-Filled Corp. v. Spring Products Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
- Pennsylvania Research Corp. v. Lescarboura Spawn Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1939
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.