Legal Opinion
Wenborne-Karpen Dryer Co. v. Dort Motor Car Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided July 10, 1926No. 4326PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DENISON, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff below, appellant here, is the owner of the Grosvenor patent, No. 1,186,477, of May 6, 1916, covering a process useful in drying varnish upon manufactured articles, like furniture. The patent contemplates apparatus in the form of a dry lriln, with special devices for putting the patented process into use during the drying operation. The appellee, the Cutler Company, is a manufacturer of dry kilns, and equips them with special apparatus which enables the user to employ the patented process or not, as he prefers.
Plaintiff brought suit upon this patent against a…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Kessler v. EldredSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Rubber Tire Wheel Co. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Foote v. Parsons Non-Skid Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1912
- Brictson Mfg. Co. v. WoodroughCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1922
- Allington v. Shevlin-Hixon Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1924
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- General Chemical Co. v. Standard Wholesale Phosphate & Acid Works, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1939
- Bechik Products, Inc. v. Flexible Products, Inc., a Corporation, and Morris Goldstein, Max Goldstein and Leo Goldstein, D/B/A Crown Mattress Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
- Speedtrack, Inc. v. Office Depot, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2015
- Demulso Corporation v. Tretolite Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1934
- Lowell v. TriplettCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.