Permutit Co. v. Wadham

The application for rehearing presents some questions touched perhaps too summarily, if at all, by the opinion (13 F.[2d] 454), and deserving further discussion.

1. Claim 5 was held valid and infringed. It differs from claim 1 by calling for an additional element — a pipe connected to the lowest point in the easing for removing the salt solution. • The identity of defendant’s structure with this claim in this respect was testified to by plaintiff’s expert, alleged in appellant’s brief, and not questioned in appellee’s brief, nor, as we remember, on the oral argument. Defendant now says that…