Legal Opinion
Quikey Manufacturing Co. Inc. v. City Products Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided March 10, 1969No. 18378_1PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EDWARDS, Circuit Judge.
This is the third time the patent involved herein has been before this court. In the first two appeals (arising out of a single District Court complaint) this court upheld the validity of the patent (United States Reissue Patent 24,166) and found it infringed. Squeez-A-Purse Corp. v. Stiller, 175 F.Supp. 667 (N.D. Ohio 1959), aff’d per curiam and remanded, 280 F.2d 424 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 828, 81 S.Ct. 67, 5 L. Ed.2d 56 (1960). Stiller v. Squeez-A-Purse Corp., 296 F.2d 504 (6th Cir. 1961).
The patent in suit involves a squeeze type coin purse designed to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Shepard v. CarriganSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- U. S. Industrial Chemicals, Inc. v. Carbide & Carbon Chemicals Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Squeez-A-Purse Corp. v. StillerDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1959
- Benjamin Stiller v. Squeez-A-Purse CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1961
- Quikey Manufacturing Co. v. City Products Corp.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1967
3Cited by4 opinions
- William H. Traver v. David MeshriyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Tee-Pak, Inc. v. St. Regis Paper CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1974
- Marcyan v. Nissen Corp.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1982
- St. Regis Paper Company v. Tee-Pac, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1973