Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. Berwick Industries, Inc.
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MUIR, District Judge.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Background P- 1231
2. Validity of the ’223 Patent p. 1232
3. Infringement of the '223 Patent p. 1236
3.1 The ’223 Apparatus Claims with Respect to the Wanchek, Tye-Sil and Camberloc Machines p. 1236
3.2 The '223 Apparatus Claims with Respect to the Bowmatic Machine P- 1237
3.3 Possible Restriction of the Broad Claims of the ’223 Patent to the Machine Illustrated in the Patent p. 1238
3.4 The ’223 Method Claims with Respect to Camberloc, Wanchek and Tye-Sil Machines p. 1239
3.5 The ’223 Method Claims with Respect to the Bowmatic Machine p. 1239
4.…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Sanitary Refrigerator Co. v. WintersSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Smith v. SnowSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- New Hampshire Bankers Ass'n v. NelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hercules Inc. v. Exxon Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1980
- Minnesota Mining And Manufacturing Company v. Berwick IndustriesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. Berwick Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Ab Iro v. Otex, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1983