1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 35 F.2d
  5. 35 F.2d 733 (1929)
 

BUCKEYE BLOWER CO. v. ARENSMEYER, WARNOCK & ZAHRNDT

No. 28.

35 F.2d 733 (1929)

BUCKEYE BLOWER CO. v. ARENSMEYER, WARNOCK & ZAHRNDT, Inc.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

November 4, 1929.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

H. A. Toulmin, Jr., of Dayton, Ohio (H. A. Toulmin, of Dayton, Ohio, and Sidney Newborg, of New York City, on the brief), for appellant.

Samuel W. Banning and Haight, Adcock & Banning, all of Chicago, Ill. (Henry F. Wolff, of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.

Before L. HAND, SWAN, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

It seems to us unnecessary to add much to the opinion of the District Judge. The question is of the scope of the claims, and that in turn must depend upon the prior art. The Powers patent, 558,610, disclosed all the parts of the infringing blower in the same functional relation; all the defendant has done is to consolidate these and inclose them in a small portable casing, so as to make a "unitary" machine. The specific details of the patent in suit it...

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