Legal Opinion
Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Nassau Electric R.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York
Decided June 29, 1901PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Supplemental Opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
THOMAS, District Judge.
The opinion recently filed herein reached the conclusion that the defendants infringed claims 27, 29, and 31, and there was reserved for further hearing the question whether there was infringement of claims 20, 21, and 22, 28, 2, 7, iq, 23, 24, and 30. Such hearing has been had, and the following conclusions result:
*648■' 'Thé language of claim 28 is precisely that of claim 29,= save the •following 'words in claim 29: “and means controlled by the motor 'switch for operating the resistance switch.” In other words, claim ■á8 does not in terms provide for unitary control. But…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mitchell v. TilghmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Elmira & H. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1896
- Matthews v. ShonebergerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1880
- Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Lorain Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1901
- Westinghouse v. GardnerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio · 1875
3Cited by3 opinions
- Whitaker v. ToddCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1916
- Foamite-Childs Corp. v. Pyrene Mfg. Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1927
- O'Rourke Engineering Const. Co. v. McMullenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1908