Legal Opinion
Naceskid Service Chain Co. v. Perdue
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided October 7, 1924No. 3998PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DENISON, Circuit Judge.
The appellant’s infringement bill, based upon the Nace patent, No. 1,192,673, July 15, 1916, for an anti-skidding device, was dismissed by the District Court for the reason that the device did not disclose patentable invention.
The device consists essentially of a series of independent short chains, each adapted to encircle the wheel rim and tire of an automobile, and particularly the large tire of a truck. One end of the ehain carries a ring; the other, a snap. These chains-being passed around the tire and the ends snapped together, making a series of rings on the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lemley v. Dobson-Evans Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1917
- Perry v. Weed Chain Tire Grip Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hazeltine Corporation v. Radio Corporation of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1931
- Sandy MacGregor Co. v. Vaco Grip Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1924
- Seymour v. Ford Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
- Penmac Corporation v. Esterbrook Steel Pen Mfg. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Hommel Mfg. Co. v. East Side Mfg. Co.District Court, N.D. California · 1926
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.