1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 172 F.2d
  5. 172 F.2d 6 (1949)
 

HUSZAR v. CINCINNATI CHEMICAL WORKS

No. 10675.

172 F.2d 6 (1949)

HUSZAR v. CINCINNATI CHEMICAL WORKS, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

February 3, 1949.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Floyd H. Crews, of New York City (Gatch, Kleinman, Roberts & Kuhn, of Cincinnati, Ohio, Darby & Darby and Floyd H. Crews, all of New York City and A. Harry Crowell, of Washington, D. C., on the brief), for appellant.

Frank Zugelter, of Cincinnati, Ohio (Frank Zugelter, James R. Clark, and Clark & Robinson, all of Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief), for appellee.

Before SIMONS, ALLEN, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.

SIMONS, Circuit Judge.

The controversy was begun by an action of the appellee for a declaratory judgment seeking to have its rights determined as against the appellant's claims for infringement of three patents covering what is known as a rod mill. The appellant counterclaimed, seeking a declaration of validity for his patents, damages for past and restraint of future infringement. The patents are Huszar 2,367,585, 2,393,245 and 2,394,453, granted respectively January...

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