1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 17 F.2d
  5. 17 F.2d 999 (1925)
 

FULTON CO. v. BISHOP & BABCOCK CO.

No. 726.

17 F.2d 999 (1925)

FULTON CO. v. BISHOP & BABCOCK CO.

District Court, N. D. Ohio, E. D.

February 13, 1925.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mauro, Cameron, Lewis & Kerkam, of Washington, D. C., and Bates, Macklin, Goldrick & Teare, of Cleveland, Ohio (L. H. Sutton and W. B. Kerkam, both of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for plaintiff.

Fay, Oberlin & Fay, of Cleveland, Ohio (John F. Oberlin and Horace B. Fay, both of Cleveland, Ohio, of counsel), for defendant.

WESTENHAVER, District Judge.

This suit is based on United States letters patent 947,229, issued January 25, 1910, and 971,838, issued October 4, 1910, both to Weston M. Fulton. All claims of both patents are in issue. The defenses are invalidity for various reasons and noninfringement.

Patent 971,838 is for a process; 947,229 is for the product. The latter is narrowly limited and is of minor importance; hence the process patent will be first considered. The...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases