Legal Opinion
Zoomar, Inc. v. Paillard Products, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided August 18, 1958No. 24741_1PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff, assignee of patents Nos. 2,-454,686 and 2,718,817 involving varifocal lenses for moving picture and television cameras, appeals from an adverse judgment in an action for patent infringement. The court below held plaintiff’s patents invalid for want of- invention, insufficient disclosure, and excessively broad claims, and alternatively held that defendant’s device did not infringe these patents. This involved all the claims of the first patent and Claims 1 and 3 of the second patent, these being the claims in suit. In addition, the court awarded judgment on…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- McClain v. OrtmayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Kessler v. EldredSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Jungersen v. Ostby & Barton Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Picard v. United Aircraft CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Formal Fashions, Inc., and Paul Kellner v. Braiman Bows, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1966
- Servo Corporation of America, and Cross-Appellant v. General Electric Company, and Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1964
- Continental Can Company, Inc. v. Old Dominion Box Company, Inc. And Dacam CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1968
- Reeves Brothers, Inc. v. US Laminating Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1968
- Artvale, Inc. v. Rugby Fabrics Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1964
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.