Legal Opinion

Bates Industries, Inc. v. Daytona Sports Co. And Daytona Products, Inc., and Paulson Manufacturingcorporation

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided April 26, 1971No. 25096-97PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

This is an appeal from the granting of a summary judgment in a patent infringement action which held invalid a utility patent and a related design patent, both of which covered a motorcycle-type protective helmet with a pivotally attached flip-up face shield. The district court found that the patented invention was not really inventive over the prior art, but merely a combination of old elements which did not accomplish a new result. According to both parties herein, the district court found, in effect, that the helmet in question was “obvious” in light of the prior art (35 U.S.C. § 103). 1…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Brooks Walker v. General Motors Corporation and Les Vogel Chevrolet CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966
  3. Charles D. Ashcroft and Milton A. Engle v. Paper Mate Mfg. CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
  4. Jack Barofsky v. General Electric CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1968
  5. Alladin Plastics, Inc., a California Corporation v. Jerrold Stephan Co., a Minnesota CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Rex Chainbelt Inc., (Cross-Appellee) v. Harco Products, Inc., Dba Dfc Company, (Cross-Appellant)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
  2. Convergence Corp. v. VideomediaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1982

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API