Legal Opinion
Emery v. George H. Bowman Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided March 10, 1926No. 4409PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MOORMAN, Circuit Judge.
Suit for infringement of United States reissue letters patent No. 15,641, designated “Artificial Pruit and Method of Producing the Same.” Claims 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 are in controversy. Each of them provides for the same general structure consisting of: (1) A hollow casting of waxlike material; (2) an application of color to the surface thereof; (3) a translucent protective covering of the colored surface of the same coefficient of expansion as the casting itself, which will not chip off or crack. Claims 11 to 14, inclusive, utilized in giving á fuzzy…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- The Barbed Wire PatentSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Loom Co. v. HigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Diamond Rubber Co. of New York v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
3Cited by5 opinions
- Black & Decker Mfg. Co. v. Baltimore Truck Tire Service Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1930
- National Battery Co. v. Richardson Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1933
- Hyman Freedman v. Overseas Scientific Corporation and G. George FieldCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
- Johnson Bros. Engineering Corp. v. Caille Bros.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1934
- F. W. Woolworth Co. v. EmeryCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930