Legal Opinion
Stewart-Warner Corporation v. Jiffy Lubricator Co.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided February 11, 1936No. 10332PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WOODROUGH, Circuit Judge.
In a suit limited on the trial to alleged infringement of claim .1 of patent No. 1,-593,791, filed February 19, 1923, and issued July 27, 1926, to Clyde G. Butler, the trial court held that the claim 1 of the patent was valid if limited to the precise form shown in the patent specifications and drawing (Fig. 2) or their clear mechanical equivalents, and not otherwise, and that unless it was so limited it would be invalid for lack of novelty and invention over the prior art. It held further that the patent as so limited was not infringed by defendant and the suit was…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Diamond Rubber Co. of New York v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Miller v. Eagle Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Potts v. CreagerSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1877
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Modern Products Supply Co. v. DrachenbergCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1945
- Oregon Saw Chain Corporation, a Corporation v. McCulloch Motors Corporation, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
- Etten v. KauffmanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
- Alemite Co. v. Jiffy Lubricator Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1949
- General Motors Corporation v. KeslingCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1947
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.