Legal Opinion
John Wolens v. F.W. Woolworth Co., J.C. Penney Company, Inc., and Wear-Ever Aluminum, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided March 10, 1983No. 82-1734, 82-1774PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PELL, Circuit Judge.
Wolens appeals from the district court’s judgment, following a full hearing, that two models of popcorn poppers manufactured by Wear-Ever Aluminum, Inc. and sold by the other named defendants do not infringe his patented hot-air popper. The defendants cross-appeal from the district court’s holding that the Wolens patent was neither obvious nor anticipated by the prior art and is therefore valid.
I. FACTS
A. The Plaintiff and His Patented Device
Wolens began designing a popcorn popper that would utilize hot air in 1971. Initially, Wolens experimented with a recirculating air…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- United States v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Sanitary Refrigerator Co. v. WintersSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Smith v. SnowSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Mobil Oil Corporation v. Linear Films, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1989
- Motorola, Inc. v. Computer Displays International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- Peter M. Roberts v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- Tyler Refrigeration v. Kysor Industrial CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Dickey-John Corporation, Cross-Appellant v. International Tapetronics Corporation and Field Electronics, Inc., Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.