Armstrong v. Motorola, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
ROBSON, District Judge.
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. NATURE OF ACTION AND PLEADINGS
1. This is an action under the patent laws of the United States for infringement of the following three patents:
a. Patent No. 1,941,066 (hereinafter called the ’066 patent), issued December 26,1933, to Edwin EL Armstrong on an application filed July 30, 1930. Plaintiff relies on claims 8, 9 and 10.
b. Patent No. 1,941,069 (hereinafter called the ’069 patent), issued December 26, 1933, to Edwin H. Arm*339strong on an application filed January 24, 1933. Plaintiff relies on claims 1 and 2.
c. Reissue Patent No. 21,660 (hereinafter…
2Cases cited48 opinions
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Lincoln Engineering Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Smith v. SnowSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Leeds & Catlin Co. v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Harries v. Air King Products Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1950
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Esther Marion Armstrong v. Motorola, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1967
- King-Seeley Thermos Co. v. Reynolds Products, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1970