Legal Opinion

Titeflex Metal Hose Co. v. Robertson

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided February 8, 1932No. 5307PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

ROBB, Associate Justice.

Appeal from a decree in the Supreme Court of the District dismissing appellant’s bill, filed under the provisions of section 4915, R. S. (35 USCA § 63), for the granting of a patent on the combination of an inner corrugated tube re-enforced by a braided covering.

Of the five claims, claim 2 is representative, and reads as follows: “The combination with a corrugated tube depending for its flexibility on relative movement of the corrugation sides, of strands helically wound about said tube in opposite directions, bearing against said corrugations and connected to the ends…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McClain v. OrtmayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Grant v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  3. Ide v. Ball Engine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Freyn Engineering Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1935

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API