Legal Opinion
Cincinnati Car Co. v. New York Rapid Transit Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided July 21, 1931No. 409PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CHASE, Circuit Judge.
The patent in suit relates to a device for joining separate cars into articulated trains. In Cincinnati Car Co. v. New York Rapid Transit Corporation (C. C. A.) 35 F.(2d) 679, it was decided that the defendant had infringed the so-called trunnion claims (claims 1, 3, 5, and 6) of the Elliott patent, No. 1,501,325, in operating its articulated trains in the manner in which the ears were joined together. Following this decision, the injunction was held in abeyance to permit the defendant to change the construction it was using so as to avoid further infringement of the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ex Parte National Enameling and Stamping CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Bissell Carpet-Sweeper Co. v. Goshen Sweeper Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1896
- Marden v. Campbell Printing-Press & Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1895
- Cincinnati Car Co. v. New York Rapid Transit Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Kalamazoo Loose-Leaf Binder Co. v. Proudfit Loose-Leaf Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1917
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cincinnati Car Co. v. New York Rapid Transit Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- Cincinnati Traction Bldg. Co. v. Pullman-Standard Car Mfg. Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1940