Legal Opinion

General Electric Co. v. United States

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided October 24, 1913No. 1149PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 31516 (T. D. 33242).

1Opinion of the CourtDe Vries, Judge

The merchandise is so-called “substitute platinum wire.” These facts, evidenced by the record, may be concisely and accurately stated in excerpts from the brief of counsel for the appellant, as follows:

The evidence of all of the witnesses who were examined upon the subject was to the effect that the platinum was in the form of a sleeve or tube passed over a fine wire *399which, supported the platinum sleeve or tube. The inside wire was an alloy of nickel and iron, but the platinum at no time became in any way amalgamated with the iron and nickel wire. * * *

The evidence shows that at no time does…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Arthur's Executors v. ButterfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. Arthur v. SussfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  3. Schloss Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Lee & Schiffer, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1944
  2. Bosch Magneto Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
  3. American Smelting & Refining Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1943
  4. P. Silverman & Son v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1944
  5. Synthetic Patents Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1944

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

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

Powered by the Exa API