Goldschmidt Thermit Co. v. Primos Chemical Co.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.
It may be said of metals generally that in their natural state they are combined with other elements, usually oxygen, and their reduction can be effected by the use of carbon, because of its affinity for oxygen. In the case of iron, the carbon comes in contact with the ore, with the result that some of the carbon remains with the metal as an impurity. But such impurity is, in the ordinary use of iron, not objectionable. In the case of other metals, where such impurities would be objectionable, they were avoided by placing the ore to be treated inside of, and the fuel…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Goldschmidt Thermit Co. v. Primos Chemical Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1915
- Goldschmidt Thermit Co. v. American Vanadium Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1916
3Cited by2 opinions
- Alumino-Thermic Corp. v. Goldschmidt Thermit Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1928
- Goldschmidt Thermit Co. v. Alumino-Thermic Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1926