Philadelphia Rubber Works Co. v. United States Rubber Reclaiming Works
District Court, W.D. New York
In Equity. Suit by the Philadelphia Rubber Works Company against the United States Rubber Reclaiming Works. On final hearing.
1Opinion of the Court
HAZED, District judge.
Bill for injunction and accounting, alleging infringement of patent No. 635,141, dated October 17, 1899, to Arthur H. Marks, complainant’s assignor, for a process for reclaiming rubber from vulcanized rubber waste. The patent plainly states as an essential of the process a dilute alkaline solution, preferably a 3 per cent, solution of caustic soda, sufficient to completely submerge the finely ground rubber in a sealed vessel, which, when subjected to- great heat, say “from 344° to 370° Fahrenheit, more or less,” for 20 hours, more or less, will devulcanize vulcanized…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Diamond Rubber Co. of New York v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Expanded Metal Co. v. BradfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Agawam Co. v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Badische Anilin & Soda Fabrik v. A. Klipstein & Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1903
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Philadelphia Rubber Works Co. v. U. S. Rubber Reclaiming WorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
- A. B. Dick Co. v. BarnettCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
- Philadelphia Rubber Works Co. v. Portage Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1917
- Claude Neon Lights, Inc. v. E. Machlett & SonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1926
- Philadelphia Rubber Works Co. v. United States Rubber Reclaiming WorksDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1920
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.