Legal Opinion
Hinde v. Hot Sulphur Springs, Colorado
District Court, D. Colorado
Decided September 28, 1972No. Civ. A. C-1936PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
BRA'TTON, District Judge.
The factual background out of which the present infringement action arose began in 1958 when plaintiff James Hinde began experimenting with concepts of water aeration to prevent winter fish kill as a favor to a friend. He first punched tiny holes in copper tubing and, with the aid of a small air compressor, pumped air through the rows of tubing he submerged in his friend’s small trout pond so that tiny bubbles of oxygen were placed in the water and the fish stopped dying. Many of the holes in the tubing, however, clogged rapidly, and the bubbles…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Lear, Inc. v. AdkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Kolene Corporation, and Deutsche Gold-Und-Silber Scheideanstalt Vormals Roessler v. Motor City Metal Treating, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1971
- David Atlas v. Eastern Air Lines, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1962
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Milgo Electronic Corporation, a Florida Corporation v. United Business Communications, Inc., a Kansas Corporation, DefendantCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1980
- James Nelson Hinde and Hinde Engineering Company v. Hot Sulphur Springs, ColoradoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1973
- Ralston Purina Co. v. Far-Mar-Co, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1984
- Schramm, Inc. v. HindeDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1974