Legal Opinion

Powerlock Floors, Inc. v. Robbins Flooring Co., Inc

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided December 17, 1968No. 17289PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT.

2Per curiam

This appeal involves the validity of plaintiff’s patent No. 3,267,630 (relating to a flooring system), and the alleged infringement thereof by defendant. The district court, on defendant’s motion for summary judgment, ruled that plaintiff’s patent was invalid for obviousness, 280 F.Supp. 627 (D.Del.1968). 1

The flooring system described in the patent in question (“Patent No. 630”) is designed to be an improvement over Patent No. 3,031,725 (“The Omholt Patent”) and involves a system in which parallel metal channels are employed, secured to a sub-floor or base, with tongued…

3Cases cited2 opinions

Allen-Bradley Company, a Wisconsin Corporation v. Air Reduction Company, Inc., a New York CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
Powerlock Floors, Inc. v. Robbins Flooring Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1968

4Cited by4 opinions

Freeman v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1987
Lyle/Carlstrom Associates, Inc. v. Manhattan Store Interiors, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1986
Powerlock Floors, Inc. v. Robbins Flooring Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
Omholt v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1973