Legal Opinion
Rokap Corp. v. Lamm
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided March 1, 1935No. 2163PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CIIESNUT, District Judge.
This case presents a suit in equity for alleged patent infringement in the usual form. The patent involved, No. 1,830,768, was issued November 10, 1931, to Isaac M. Rod, of Dublin, Pennsylvania, on application filed January 5, 1927, and has been assigned to the plaintiff corporation, which was formed by the patentee, Rod, and one Kaplan. The patent is a method and product, and not a machine, patent. It contains nine claims of which Nos. 4 and 8 are selected by the plaintiff as illustrative of all, No. 4 being a claim for the product and No. 8 for the method of…
2Cases cited32 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
- McClain v. OrtmayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Atlantic Works v. BradySupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Carbice Corp. of America v. American Patents Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Asphalt Industries, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1966
- Insul-Wool Insulation Corp. v. Home Insulation, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949
- A.J. Industries, Inc. v. The Dayton Steel Foundry CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1968
- Rokap Corp. v. LammCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1936
- Tumbler v. Baltimore Paint & Color Works, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 1935
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.