King Ax Co. v. Hubbard
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern Distric t of Ohio.
1Opinion of the Court
TAFT, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from a decree iu a patent case in which the circuit court found the po tent of the complainant to be valid, and to be infringed by the defendant’s machine. 89 Fed. 713. The patent was No. 500,084 and was granted on June 20, 1893, to C. W. Hubbard, as assignee of James Taylor, for an improvement in the manufacture of axes. The answer set up ihe defenses of invalidity for want of novelty, public use for more than two years before the application, and abandonment and noninfringement.
The patentee, in his specifications, says:
“My invention relates to the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Miller v. Eagle Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Smith & Griggs Manufacturing Co. v. SpragueSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Bundy Mfg. Co. v. Detroit Time-Register Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899
- Sewall v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- McCormick Harvesting Mach. Co. v. C. Aultman & Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Williams Iron Works Co. v. Hughes Tool Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1940
- Dowagiac Mfg. Co. v. Superior Drill Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1902
- Carson Inv. Co. v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1928
- Vrooman v. PenhollowCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1910
- Schiebel Toy & Novelty Co. v. ClarkCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.