Duraloy Co. v. Carnegie-illinois Steel Corp.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
McVICAR, District Judge.
After hearing, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact.
1. This is an action to recover damages and for injunctive relief by reason of alleged infringement by defendant of Kathner method patent 1,810,612 and Kathner Reissue patent 17,413.
2. Plaintiff, the Duraloy Company, is a corporation and citizen of the State of Delaware. The defendant, the Carnegie-Illinois Steel Company (successor to the American Sheet & Tin Plate Company) is a corporation of the State of New Jersey.
Kathner Patent 1,810,612.
3. Arthur T. Kathner filed…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Electric Storage Battery Co. v. ShimadzuSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Wilson v. SimpsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Wilson v. RousseauSupreme Court of the United States · 1846
- Maytag Co. v. Hurley MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Edwin L. Wiegand Co. v. Harold E. Trent Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bulldog Electric Products Co. v. Cole Electric Products Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1943
- Standard Duplicating Machines Co. v. American Business Machines Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1949
- Standard Duplicating Machines Co. v. American Business Machines Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1948