Legal Opinion

Coakwell v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided July 19, 1961No. 213-57PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWhitaker, Judge

Plaintiff sues for the infringement of his patent on an anti-blackout device (United States Letters Patent No. 2,676,586). The patent was applied for on June 24, 1942, and was issued on April 27,1954.

Defendant asserts that plaintiff’s patent was anticipated by the prior art and prior knowledge and is, therefore, invalid. This is defendant’s chief defense. It also says that plaintiff’s patent must be limited to the particular embodiment of it as disclosed by the drawings and specifications and that, as so limited, its device did not infringe it.

The apparatus on which plaintiff secured a patent…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Morgan v. DanielsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Radio Corp. of America v. Radio Engineering Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
  3. Ferwerda v. CoakwellDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1953
  4. Thomas Ferwerda and United States of America v. Charles A. Coakwell, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1955
  5. Coakwell v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1957

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Charles A. Coakwell v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
  2. Abbott GmbH & Co. v. Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2012
  3. Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, USA, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2014
  4. CoakwellUnited States Court of Claims · 1970
  5. Default Proof Credit Card System, Inc. v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.District Court, S.D. Florida · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API