Legal Opinion
Thomas W. Nicholson v. Carl W. Mullis Engineering and Manufacturing Company, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided March 6, 1963No. 8639_1PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ALBERT V. BRYAN, Circuit Judge.
Log barking machines are the subject of the three patents now before us in the review of the District Court’s determination : (1) that the two owned by plaintiff-appellant Nicholson are invalid, (2) that the one belonging to defendant-appellees Mullís is valid, and (3) that the latter has been infringed by an unpat-ented machine of the appellant. We sustain the District Judge in rejecting Nicholson’s two patents, but we cannot join in his accordance of validity to Mul-lís’. Thus infringement is not reached.
The issues were made by the suit of Thomas W. Nicholson…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Elizabeth v. Pavement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Egbert v. LippmannSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Aerovox Corporation v. Polymet Mfg. CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- Kiwi Coders Corporation and James G. McKay v. Acro Tool & Die Works and Alfred J. Farkas, 1Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1958
- McCreery Engineering Co. v. Massachusetts Fan Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1912
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- McCullough Tool Co. v. Well Surveys, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1965
- The Robbins Company v. Lawrence Manufacturing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1973
- American Infra-Red Radiant Co. v. Lambert Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1966
- Duplan Corp. v. Deering Milliken, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1977
- The Taylor-Reed Corporation v. Mennen Food Products, Inc., American Home Products Corporation, and Frederick C. MennenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1963
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.