1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 371 F.2d
  5. 371 F.2d 1004 (1966)
 

TIDEWATER PATENT DEVELOPMENT CO. v. KITCHEN

No. 10463.

371 F.2d 1004 (1966)

TIDEWATER PATENT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, Incorporated, Appellee, v. K. M. KITCHEN and Virginia M. Kitchen, partners trading as K. M. Kitchen Beauty Supply Company, Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Decided November 29, 1966.

On Rehearing February 14, 1967.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Samuel J. Stoll, New York City (Richard B. Spindle, III, Willcox, Cooke, Savage & Lawrence, and Willcox, Savage, Lawrence, Dickson & Spindle, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for appellants.

George B. Finnegan, Jr., New York City (William D. Denson, Albert H. Brodkin, New York City, and Penn, Stuart & Miller, Abingdon, Va., on brief), for appellee.

Before BOREMAN, BRYAN and BELL, Circuit Judges.

ALBERT V. BRYAN, Circuit Judge.

A patent for a permanent hair waving solution and method was upheld, and declared infringed, in the District Court at the suit of the owner, Tidewater Patent Development Company, Inc. against the partnership of K. M. Kitchen Beauty Supply Company. Defendants appeal and we reverse, finding the patent invalid.

In our judgment the patent in controversy (i. e. the six claims in dispute), known as No. 323, not only is void as duplicative...

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