Concrete Steel Co. v. Vandenburgh

Supreme Court

Concrete Steel Co. v. Vandenburgh

261 U.S. 16, 43 S. Ct. 335, 67 L. Ed. 512, 1923 U.S. LEXIS 2524

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided February 19, 1923·No. 238·Published

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Taft

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a review' of the decree of the Circuit .Court of Appeals of the Second Circuit sustaining the validity of claim No. 3 of the Vandenburgh patent, just considered in the previous case of Vandenburgh v. Truscon Steel Co., ante, 6, and awarding $15,000 for profits to Van-denburgh for defendant’s infringement. The two cases can not be distinguished. We must, therefore, reverse *17 the decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals of the Second Circuit and direct the dismissal of the bill.

Reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Chief Justice Taft

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a review' of the decree of the Circuit .Court of Appeals of the Second Circuit sustaining the validity of claim No. 3 of the Vandenburgh patent, just considered in the previous case of Vandenburgh v. Truscon Steel Co., ante, 6, and awarding $15,000 for profits to Van-denburgh for defendant’s infringement. The two cases can not be distinguished. We must, therefore, reverse *17 the decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals of the Second Circuit and direct the dismissal of the bill.

Reversed.

Concrete Steel Co. v. Vandenburgh, 261 U.S. 16, 43 S. Ct. 335, 67 L. Ed. 512, 1923 U.S. LEXIS 2524 (1923).

Pincite

261 U.S. 16 (Concrete Steel Co. v. Vandenburgh) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.