Legal Opinion
Flat Slabs Patents Co. v. Wright, Barrett & Stilwell Co.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided August 12, 1920PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BOOTH, District Judge.
This is a suit for injunction and for an accounting because of alleged infringement of claims 1, 3, and 4, Nor-cross patent, No. 698,542, April 29, 1902, covering a certain type of reinforced concrete flat slab monolithic flooring. Since the commencement of the suit the patent has expired, so that the remedy by injunction is no longer available. The'defenses interposed are invalidity of the patent for lack of invention in view of the prior art; also non-infringement of said patent by the defendant, who is the owner and user of a building in which it is claimed the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Badische Anilin & Soda Fabrik v. A. Klipstein & Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1903
- Drum v. TurnerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1914
- Electric Manuf'g Co. v. Edison Electric Light Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1894
- Turner v. Lauter Piano Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1918
- Bone v. Commissioners of Marion Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Carson Inv. Co. v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1928
- Lektophone Corp. v. Miller Bros.District Court, D. Delaware · 1930
- Rousso v. First Nat. Bank in DetroitDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1927
- Carson Inv. Co. v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1928
- Carson Inv. Co. v. Calumet & Arizona Mining Co.District Court, D. Arizona · 1928