Legal Opinion
Universal Electric Co. v. A. O. Smith Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided April 15, 1981No. 79-1342PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LIVELY, Circuit Judge.
Universal Electric Company (Universal) appeals from a judgment of the district court holding its patents 3,567,973 (973) and 3,732,616 (616) invalid. Patent 973 is a product patent and 616 is a method patent which sets forth the process by which the device in 973 is manufactured and assembled. The abstracts and specifications are identical in the two patents and the claims of 616 track some of those in 973, with added words to indicate that it is a method patent. Patent 973 was issued on March 2, 1971, and 616 was issued on May 15,1973 as a division of 973. This action…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Hotchkiss v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Lawrence R. Sperberg v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1975
- Anderson's-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Monroe Auto Equipment Company v. Heckethorn Manufacturing & Supply CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1964
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Twm Manufacturing Company, Inc., and Turner Quick-Lift Corporation, Plaintiffs v. Dura Corporation and Kidde, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
- Radio Steel & Mfg. Co. v. MTD Products Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1983
- Mead Digital Systems, Inc. Mead Corporation, Cross-Appellant v. A.B. Dick Company and Gould, Inc., Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- General Motors Corporation v. Toyota Motor Company, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981
- Coal Processing Equipment, Inc. v. CampbellDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1981
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.