Legal Opinion
United Shoe MacHinery Corporation v. Day Wood Heel Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided February 13, 1931No. 5319, 5320PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HICKS, Circuit Judge.
Suit by United Shoe Machinery Corporation against the Day Wood Heel Company for infringement of patent to Russ, No. 1,-536,691, dated May 5, 1925, for a “Heel Blank Breast-Shaping Machine” and of patent to Russ, No. 1,528,345, dated March 3, 1925, for “Heel and Method of Making tho Same.” The defenses were noninvention, anticipation, and prior use and knowledge. Claims 1, 3, 5, and 6 of patent No. 1,536,691, herein called the machine patent, and all claims of patent No. 1,528,345, herein called the product and method patent, wore in suit. The court sustained the machine…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- The Barbed Wire PatentSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Topliff v. TopliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Deering v. Winona Harvester WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Diamond Patent Co. v. S. E. Carr Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1914
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Cold Metal Products Company and the Youngstown Research and Development Company v. E. W. Bliss CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1960
- Motor Improvements v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1931
- Petersime Incubator Co. v. Bundy Incubator Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
- McKay Co. v. Shott Mfg. Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1937
- Ceramic Process Co. v. Cincinnati Advertising Products Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1939
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.