Legal Opinion
Tietig v. Ladd
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided April 29, 1964No. Civ. A. No. 4004-62PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JACKSON, District Judge.
This civil action was instituted pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 145 seeking judgment .authorizing the defendant, Commissioner of Patents, to grant a patent on an application 1 Serial No. 750,603 entitled “Method of Adding Solid Material to Molten Metal”, filed on July 24, 1958, by the plaintiffs, Rudolph Tietig, Jr., and Daniel J. Pollingue, Jr.
The invention at bar relates to a method of adding predetermined quantities of solid material additives such as manganese, ferrosilicon, and aluminum to the ladle during the tapping operation of an open-hearth furnace. The solid…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Abbott v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Application of Philip A. Shaffer, JrCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956
- Application of Harvey E. Hortman, JrCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1959
- Edwin A. Kaakinen, and Kaakinen Fish Company v. The Peelers Company, a PartnershipCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
- Application of Arthur L. ScottCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Sticker Industrial Supply Corp. v. Blaw-Knox Co., and A. J. Boynton & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1966
- Teledyne Industries, Inc. v. Windmere Products, Inc.District Court, S.D. Florida · 1977
- Sticker Industrial Supply Corp. v. Blaw-Knox Co. And A. J. Boynton & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1968
- Maschinenfabrik Rieter A. G. v. Greenwood MillsDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1972
- Hirschfeld v. BannerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1978