General Electric Co. v. Yost Electric Mfg. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
1Opinion of the Court
TOWNSEND, Circuit Judge.
The court below reached the conclusion that “complainant’s device consists merely in making in one piece that which was formerly made in two parts, and performs no new function”; and that “the production of a seamless insulating lining having a shoulder intermediate its length required nothing more than the knowledge of the trained engineer or workman.” The correctness of this conclusion is challenged on the following grounds: “The fact that Painter’s lining is made in one piece is only incidental. The important fact is that Painter’s lining is made without open seams…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Howard v. Detroit Stove WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Standard Caster & Wheel Co. v. Caster Socket Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1901
- Consolidated Electric Manuf'g Co. v. HoltzerCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1895
3Cited by20 opinions
- Kirsch Mfg. Co. v. Gould Mersereau Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- Welsh Manufacturing Company v. Sunware Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- D'Arcy v. Staples & Hanford Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1908
- Supreme Mfg. Corp. v. Security Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1924
- General Electric Co. v. Yost Electric Mfg. Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1913
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.