1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 20 F.2d
  5. 20 F.2d 533 (1927)
 

DWIGHT & LLOYD SINTERING CO. v. GREENAWALT

20 F.2d 533 (1927)

DWIGHT & LLOYD SINTERING CO., Inc., v. GREENAWALT (AMERICAN ORE RECLAMATION CO., Intervener).

District Court, S. D. New York.

April 18, 1927.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

George H. Gilman, of Hartford, Conn. (Thomas Ewing, Albert M. Austin, and Otto C. Wierum, all of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Fish, Richardson & Neave, of New York City (Charles Neave and Clarence D. Kerr, both of New York City, and Harry A. Beimes, of St. Louis, Mo., of counsel), for defendant.

Hardy, Stancliffe & Whitaker, of New York City (John L. Jackson, of Chicago, Ill., of counsel), for intervener.

THACHER, District Judge (after stating the facts as above).

The patents in suit relate to "sintering" of fine ores; that is, their treatment with heat, by which they are agglomerated into cohesive porous masses, suitable for reduction in a blast furnace. The Huntington and Haberlein process patent, No. 786,814 (April 11, 1905), was the best method of sintering prior to Dwight & Lloyd patent, No. 882,517 (March 17, 1908). This process was capable of producing some...

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