Beach v. Inman
78 F. 923, 24 C.C.A. 408, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 1723
Opinion
We agree with the judge who heard the motion in the circuit court that the grooved roller of defendant’s machine is substantially the upper clamping die of the patent, for the mechanical reasons set forth in the opinion below. That being so, defendant’s machine is an infringement, and the order of the circuit court (75 Fed. 840) is affirmed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Beach v. Inman, 78 F. 923, 24 C.C.A. 408, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 1723 (2d Cir. 1897).
78 F. 923 (Beach v. Inman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
David Belais, Inc. v. Goldsmith Bros. Smelting & Refining Co.
6 F.2d 930 (S.D. New York, 1925)
Beach v. Hobbs
92 F. 146 (First Circuit, 1899)