Legal Opinion
Skinner Bros. Belting Co. v. Oil Well Improvements Co.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided December 24, 1931No. 490PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McDERMOTT, Circuit Judge.
The defendant appeals from a decree adjudging claims 1 and 2 of patent to Heggem, 1,175,261, and claims 1, 2, 3, 4, and 12, of Heggem patent 1,256,899 valid and infringed. Both patents involve a device for sealing a drilling oil well so that the drilling cable may operate through the device and at the same time prevent oil from escaping at the mouth of the well.
The validity of the patents, and the range of equivalency accorded them, depends in part upon the prior art. The prior art is sketchy, and, at the time the inventor entered the field, it was not crowded. The…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Seymour v. OsborneSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Bates v. CoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- National Hollow Brake-Beam Co. v. Interchangeable Brake-Beam Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Leeds & Catlin Co. v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- McCullough Tool Co. v. Well Surveys, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1965
- Pointer v. Six Wheel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1949
- Williams Iron Works Co. v. Hughes Tool Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1940
- Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co. v. Hughes Tool Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1938
- Bewal, Inc., a Corporation of Kansas and Benjamine C. Edwards, Jr. v. Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, a Corporation of DelawareCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1961
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.