Legal Opinion
Independent Pneumatic Tool Co. v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided March 5, 1951No. Civ. A. No. 47 C 855PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOLLY, District Judge.
Plaintiff’s complaint asks for a declaratory judgment finding that claim 7 of Fitch patent No. 2,219,865 and claims 6, 8, 14, 18 and 30 of Amtsberg patent No. 2,219,883 are invalid and that said claims of the Fitch and Amtsberg patents have not been infringed by plaintiff.
Defendant in its answer and counterclaim averred that it is the owner of the Amtsberg and Fitch patents, that the patents are valid and that plaintiff was engaged in the sale of impact wrenches which infringed the claims of said patents, mentioning particular wrenches known as Thor Models 4, 6, 10, 12…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Boyden Power-Brake Co. v. Westinghouse Westinghouse v. Boyden Power-Brake Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Westinghouse v. Boyden Power Brake Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co. v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Leeds & Catlin Co. v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Burr v. DuryeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Independent Pneumatic Tool Co. v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1952
- Briggs v. M & J Diesel Locomotive Filter Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1964
- Warner and Swasey Company v. Edwin Held, Jr., as Etc., and Cutting Tools, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969