Legal Opinion
Ruth v. Climax Molybdenum Co.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided December 14, 1937No. Nos. 1550-1552PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BRATTON, Circuit Judge.
These are three separate actions for alleged infringement of letters patent No. 1,-277,750, issued to Jackson A. Pearce in 1918 and assigned to plaintiff. Claims 1, 3, and 5 are involved. The cases were consolidated for trial, but separate findings of fact and conclusions of law were made. The court found in each case that claims 1 and 3 were not infringed, and that claim 5 was invalid. The bills were dismissed and plaintiff appealed. Reference will be made to the parties as they appeared in the court below.
The first questions arise on motions to dismiss the appeals.…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Atlantic Works v. BradySupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Altoona Publix Theatres, Inc. v. American Tri-Ergon Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
- I. T. S. Rubber Co. v. Essex Rubber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Smith v. Magic City Kennel Club, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Ensten v. Simon, Ascher & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- O'LEARY v. Liggett Drug Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1945
- Dominion Magnesium Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
- Jones v. BodanessCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1951
- Tschappat v. Hinderliter Tool Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1938
- Signal Mfg. Co. v. Kilgore Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1952
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.