Legal Opinion
Michigan Tool Co. v. Drummond
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided September 15, 1938No. 68134PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LUHRING, Justice.
On rehearing of plaintiffs’ motion to strike and dismiss the second counterclaim of the defendants, Charles H. Schurr and the Lees-Bradner Company, for infringement of United States Patent Number 1,-642,179.
The plaintiffs seek the issuance of a. patent pursuant to the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 63, 35 U.S.C.A. § 63, on the ground that the defendant, Commissioner of Patents, acting by and through the Examiner of Interferences, erroneously denied priority of the invention in the interference issues to the plaintiff, William F. Dalzen, and his co-plaintiff assignee, and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- General Electric Co. v. Marvel Rare Metals Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Century Distilling Co. v. Continental Distilling Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
- Flowers v. Magor Car Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1928
3Cited by6 opinions
- Montecatini Edison, S.P.A. (A Corporation of Italy) v. Karl Ziegler, and E. I. Dupont De Nemours and Company (A Corporation of Delaware)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
- General Electric Co. v. Hygrade Sylvania CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1944
- General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Jefferson Chemical Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1970
- Union Nat. Bank of Youngstown, Ohio v. Universal-Cyclops Steel Corp.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1952
- Vahle v. MarkhamDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1946
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.