Legal Opinion
MacGregor v. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided May 1, 1942No. 1876 Civil ActionPublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GIBSON, District Judge.
The facts involved in the instant matter, recited substantially and in sequence as they appear in the Complaint, are as follows :
The defendant (hereinafter called Westinghouse) was the owner of Patent No. 1,651,709, for a brazing solder containing phosphorus and copper as its main and essential ingredients. In 1937 it brought suit in this court, against the plaintiff for alleged infringement. This action was settled by plaintiff entering into an agreement with defendant by which the former was given a non-exclusive right to the use and sale of the patented solder, and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Crosley Corporation v. Hazeltine CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
- Pratt v. Paris Gas Light & Coke Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Luckett v. Delpark, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Quaker State Oil Refining Co. v. TalbotSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
3Cited by12 opinions
- Aralac, Inc. v. Hat Corporation of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
- Thiokol Chemical Corp. v. Burlington Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
- Jewell W. Vanderveer v. Erie Malleable Iron CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1956
- Thiokol Chemical Corp. v. Burlington Industries, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1970
- Components, Inc. v. Western Electric CompanyDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1979
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.