Legal Opinion

Williamson Heater Co. v. Monitor Stove Co.

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided July 14, 1922No. 232PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PECK, District Judge.

Suit for infringement of claim 2 of patent No. 1,171,245, to Boyd E. Rainey, February 8, 1916, hot air furnace, on application of December 7, 1914. The answer, inter alia, denies infringement and avers limitation by file wrapper.

Counterclaim: Defendant counterclaims on patent to Short, No. 933,128, September 7, 1909, on application of November 15, 1906. The answer to counterclaim denies infringement, and asserts estoppel by the file wrapper and other defenses.

The Rainey Patent.

The first issue to be considered is that of infringement. The essence of the claim in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Torrey v. HancockCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910
  2. Monitor Stove & Range Co. v. L. J. Mueller Furnace Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1918

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Monitor Stove Co. v. Williamson Heater Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1924
  2. Bocz v. Hudson Motor Car Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API