Legal Opinion

Lorraine v. Townsend

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided June 4, 1923No. 3945PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DIETRICH, District Judge.

The suit involves a consideration of patented inventions, used in connection with oil wells, for separating the constituents of the crude flow from well pipes — generally a frothy mixture of dry gas, light and heavy oil, water, and sand. Plaintiffs below, appellees here, are the holders of patent No. 1,269,134, issued to Milon J. Trumble, June 11, 1918, upon an application filed November 14, 1914, which they charge is infringed by apparatus the defendant manufactures and sells. The essence of the invention is supposed to be the conception, in combination, that the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  2. Standard Oil Co. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1922

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hartford Empire Co. v. Obear Nester Glass Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1931
  2. Greenawalt v. American Smelting & Refining Co.District Court, D. Montana · 1925
  3. Lorraine v. TownsendDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1924
  4. Townsend v. Lorraine Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 1929
  5. Lorraine Corp. v. Union Tank & Pipe Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API