Weir Frog Co. v. Porter
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western Division of the Southern District of Ohio; Howard C. Hollister, Judge. Suit in equity by Joseph Y. Porter against the Weir Frog Company. Decree for complainant, and defendant appeals. Porter brought, against the Weir Frog Company, a suit for injunction and accounting based upon infringement of Porter’s patent, No. 556,317, issued March 10, 1896, for a derailing switch.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western Division of the Southern District of Ohio; Howard C. Hollister, Judge. Suit in equity by Joseph Y. Porter against the Weir Frog Company. Decree for complainant, and defendant appeals. Porter brought, against the Weir Frog Company, a suit for injunction and accounting based upon infringement of Porter’s patent, No. 556,317, issued March 10, 1896, for a derailing switch. His device belongs to the common type of switches employing a movable switch point, which, when held against one rail of the track, will operate to lead the…
1Opinion of the CourtDenison, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). It is not necessary to go very far into the state of the art. It is clear and is conceded that, with one exception, everything about Porter’s invention was entirely common. Switches and switch points were old. Operating them by rods or cables running to a distant point was old. The use of a spring or weight to hold the switch point normally in one of its two alternative positions, so that it would always be in that position, excepting while temporary force held it in another position, was old. It was old to operate a switch of this particular kind from a…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Loom Co. v. HigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Diamond Rubber Co. of New York v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Topliff v. TopliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Atlantic Works v. BradySupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Mast, Foos & Co. v. Stover Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Mathews Conveyer Co. v. Palmer-Bee Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
- Old Town Ribbon & Carbon Co. v. Columbia Ribbon & Carbon Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- Ohmer Fare Register Co. v. OhmerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1916
- United States Gypsum Co. v. Consolidated Expanded Metal CompaniesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1942
- Lyman Mfg. Co. v. Bassick Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1927
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.