Legal Opinion
Bird Provision Co. v. Owens Country Sausage, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided February 24, 1978No. 75-3412PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RONEY, Circuit Judge:
Plaintiff Bird Provision Company claims that Owens Country Sausage, Inc. and two of its officers infringed on Bird Provision’s patented process for making fresh pork sausage. Defendants admit infringement, but contend that the Bird Provision patent is invalid on several grounds. The district court declared the patent invalid on the grounds of prior public use and obviousness, and Bird Provision appealed. On the basis of the district court’s findings and decision, Bird Provision Co. v. Owens Country Sausage, Inc., 379 F.Supp. 744 (N.D.Tex.1974), we affirm.
I. Background
The…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- United States v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Kaspar Wire Works, Inc. v. Leco Engineering and MacHine Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
- Studiengesellschaft Kohle Mbh, as Trustee for the Max-Planck-Institut Fur Kohlenforschung v. Eastman Kodak CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- Rohm and Haas Co. v. Dawson Chemical Co., Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1983
- Arbrook, Inc. And John J. Nappi v. American Hospital Supply Corporation, Tackmer Corporation, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Ludlow Corporation v. Textile Rubber & Chemical Co., Inc. And Harvey HowaltCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.