Legal Opinion
American Technical Machinery Corp. v. Caparotta
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided March 31, 1964No. 60-C-984PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MISHLER, District Judge.
Plaintiff’s amended complaint states a claim for patent infringement of Patent No. 2,742,327. Plaintiff, at pre-trial (order dated 4/9/63), narrowed the claimed infringement to claims 2, 6, 13, 16 and 17. The answer pre-dates the amended complaint and is deemed the answer to the amended complaint (pre-trial order). Defendant attacks the validity of the patent on the following grounds:
1. The invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Loom Co. v. HigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Lincoln Engineering Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Boyd v. Janesville Hay Tool Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Matthews v. Koolvent Metal Awning Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1946
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- American Technical Machine Corp. v. CaparottaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1964
- American Technical Machine Corp. v. Sylvester CaparottaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1964