BAIN v. M. A. HANNA COMPANY

No. 15025.

331 F.2d 974 (1964)

Charles Kremer BAIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The M. A. HANNA COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee, and Blaw-Knox Company, Intervenor-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

May 18, 1964.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Edmund C. Rogers, St. Louis, Mo., (Lawrence C. Kingsland, St. Louis, Mo., James P. Hume, Chicago, Ill., George S. Roudebush, St. Louis, Mo., on the brief), for appellant.

Walter J. Blenko, Sr., Pittsburgh, Pa. (Paul Rahm, Iron Mountain, Mich., Walter J. Blenko, Jr., Pittsburgh, Pa., on the brief), for appellees.

Before MILLER and CECIL, Circuit Judges, and THORNTON, District Judge.


THORNTON, District Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the District Court holding that (1) all of the claimed novel features of Bain Patent No. 2,667,750 had been described in the cited prior art and specifications, (2) Bain Patent No. 2,667,750 is lacking in novelty and invention, and (3) the method used by defendant in the sinking of the Homer-Wauseca shaft was neither a copy nor was it the equivalent of the method described in Bain Patent No. 2,667,750...

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