Legal Opinion
Ansul Company v. Uniroyal, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided June 6, 1969No. 68 Civ. 2244PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MANSFIELD, District Judge.
In this action for a declaratory judgment initiated by plaintiff Ansul, in which plaintiffs-interveners later joined, plaintiff seeks an adjudication of invalidity, unenforceability and non-infringement of Claims 1 and 7 of U. S. Patent No. 2,614,916 (the “916” patent herein), issued on October 21, 1952 to two scientists then employed by defendant Uniroyal, Inc. (Otto Hoffman and Dwight Schoene) and assigned by them to it, which granted certain claims for an agricultural chemical composition comprising 1, 2-dihydropyridazine-3, 6-dione and its salts 1 (“dione”…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- United States v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Boyden Power-Brake Co. v. Westinghouse Westinghouse v. Boyden Power-Brake Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Smith v. SnowSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Studiengesellschaft Kohle Mbh, as Trustee for the Max-Planck-Institut Fur Kohlenforschung v. Eastman Kodak CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- The Ansul Company v. Uniroyal, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1971
- Louis W. Parker, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. Motorola, Inc., Defendant-Appellant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
- Leonard Kahn v. Dynamics Corporation of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
- Ansul Company v. Uniroyal, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.