Legal Opinion
Crowell v. Baker Oil Tools, Inc.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided March 26, 1943No. 2455PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
J. F. T. O’CONNOR, District Judge.
This is a motion for a summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. The action upon which this motion is predicated was commenced under the patent laws of the United States, 28 U.S.C.A. § 41(7), in which declaratory relief is sought pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 400.
On February 18, 1930 Letters Patent o£ the United States, No. 1,748,007, were granted and issued to the defendant, Reuben C. Baker, for guiding, floating and cementing device for well casings. Prior to said grant and issuance,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Arizona v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Allen v. Radio Corporation of AmericaDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1942
- Pollen v. Ford Instrument Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
- Palmer v. PalmerDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1940
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Crowell v. Baker Oil Tools, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944
- Smith v. Alabama Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1975
- Alltop v. JC PENNEY COMPANYCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
- Crowell v. Baker Oil Tools, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944