Legal Opinion · Dissent

Edward H. Green and Newman-Green, Inc. v. Aerosol Research Company

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided February 17, 1967No. 15821Published

1DissentCummings, Circuit Judge

With regret, I find myself compelled to dissent. The opening clause of paragraph 12 of the 1962 settlement agreement conveyed rights only “under Green ’735.” Under paragraph 12(c), Newman-Green granted Aerosol a non-exclusive license under Green ’735. Under paragraph 12(b), Newman-Green covenanted not to sue Aerosol “for alleged infringement of Green ’735.”

Paragraph 13, provided that “Nothing herein [in the settlement agreement] shall be construed to grant to either of the parties, rights under any patents other than those specifically named here*795in * * Since this plain, unambiguous language…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. The Gillette Company v. The Travelers Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1966
  3. Buchanan v. SwiftCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1942
  4. In-Sink-Erator Manufacturing Company, a Wisconsin Corporation v. Waste King Corporation, a California CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API