Legal Opinion
Magnetics, Inc. v. The Arnold Engineering Company
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided February 17, 1971No. 18182_1PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Per curiam
Plaintiff is the owner of three patents that it sought to enforce in this action. Eyberger Reissue Patent 25,441 and Eyberger Patent 3,244,782 are apparatus and method patents for compressing metallic powder into toroidal (doughnut-shaped) cores. The third patent, Brandon-Eyberger 3,011,213, covers a machine for lubricating die cavities.
The district court’s opinion held each of the patents invalid because of obviousness (85 U.S.C. § 103) and public use more than one year before their application dates (35 U.S.C. § 102(b)). The court also held that claims 1, 2, 7, and 11 of the reissue patent,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Monolith Portland Midwest Company, a Nevada Corporation v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- Electric Storage Battery Co. v. ShimadzuSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Gillman v. SternCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
- Esme E. Rosaire v. Baroid Sales Division, National Lead CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
- Sutter Products Company v. Pettibone Mulliken CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1970
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- In Re James A. Smith and James H. McLaughlin and Sterling Drug, Inc., IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- General Electric Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1981
- Alfred H. Faulkner v. Baldwin Piano & Organ Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
- Atlas Chemical Industries, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Moraine Products, Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1974
- In Re James T. HamiltonCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.