Akimoff v. Dynamic Balancing Mach. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Cross-Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; J. Whitaker Thompson, Judge. Suit in equity by the Dynamic Balancing Machine Company and others against Nicholas W. Akimoff and another for infringement of patents.
Read the full summary
Cross-Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; J. Whitaker Thompson, Judge. Suit in equity by the Dynamic Balancing Machine Company and others against Nicholas W. Akimoff and another for infringement of patents. From so much of the decree (279 Fed. 285), as held two of the claims of one patent valid and infringed, the defendants appeal, and from that portion of the decree which held other claims invalid, complainants appeal.
1Opinion of the Court
No. 2863.
BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.
[1] This is an appeal from that part of the decree of the District Court holding claims 12 and 13 of *481letters patent No. 1,296,610, valid and infringed. The patent concerns machines for ascertaining the static or standing and the dynamic or running unbalance of rolls and other revolvable appliances.
Taking, for illustration, a roll: It may have two kinds of unbalance. If there is a superabundance of material in any part of its circumferential plane, the roll will not stánd when, placed, but will turn over until the heavier part forces it to rest at the lowest…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dynamic Balancing Mach. Co. v. AkimoffDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1922
3Cited by4 opinions
- Heller Bros. v. Crucible Steel Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1924
- Robeson Process Co. v. RobesonDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1923
- Stoehrer & Pratt Dodgem Corp. v. Lusse Bros.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1925
- Tom Lockerbie, Inc. v. FruhlingDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1961