Legal Opinion
Shimadzu v. Electric Storage Battery Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided October 8, 1940No. 7727PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.
This case at first involved the validity and infringement of a group of six patents having to do with the production of lead powder for use in making storage battery plates. They will be referred to by their abbreviated numbers. We are now directly concerned with the validity and infringement of one of them (1,548,149) and, incidentally, with the scope of another (1,-548,150). These two patents issued on the same day, May 11, 1926. T50 was the more explicit of the two and included a statement of what the patentee believed to be the underlying scientific principle…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Diamond Rubber Co. of New York v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Electric Storage Battery Co. v. ShimadzuSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Eames v. AndrewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- General Electric Co. v. Cooper Hewitt Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1918
- SMIMADZU v. Electric Storage Battery Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1936
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Electric Storage Battery Co. v. ShimadzuCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
- Cowles Co. v. Frost White Paper Mills, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1948