Concrete Appliances Co. v. Meinken
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western Division of the Southern District of Ohio; Howard C. Hollister, Judge. Suit by the Concrete Appliances Company and another against Dietrich Meinken and others. From a decree for defendants, plaintiffs appeal. Suit upon patents numbered 948,719, issued February 8, 1910, to L. Callahan, and 948,746, issued February 8, 1910, to A. L. Smith.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western Division of the Southern District of Ohio; Howard C. Hollister, Judge. Suit by the Concrete Appliances Company and another against Dietrich Meinken and others. From a decree for defendants, plaintiffs appeal. Suit upon patents numbered 948,719, issued February 8, 1910, to L. Callahan, and 948,746, issued February 8, 1910, to A. L. Smith. This case involves the tower apparatus now in common use for elevating and distributing wet (“mush”) concrete upon the successive floors of high buildings, constructed in whole or in part…
1Opinion of the CourtDenison, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1, 2] It goes without saying that the Smith patent can get no advantage merely because it has been owned and commercially exploited along with the Callahan patent- Upon this record, Smith cannot claim to be tire inventor of anything shown by Callahan’s application, except as the latter is modified by the later concession of priority. The Callahan patent is not a part of the prior art, in the sense in which that phrase is used with reference only to publications, but the Smith patent, both as to anticipation and as to the presence of invention, must be…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Loom Co. v. HigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Potts v. CreagerSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Expanded Metal Co. v. BradfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Hobbs v. BeachSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Grinnell Washing MacHine Co. v. E. E. Johnson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Concrete Appliances Co. v. GomerySupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Kurtz v. Belle Hat Lining Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- Kerner Incinerator Co. v. Townsend Estates, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1926
- Line Material Co. v. Brady Electric & Mfg. Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1924
- Concrete Appliances Co. v. GomeryDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1922
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.