Electrolux Corporation v. Dustpak, Ltd., Inc., and Anschel Wolf

Second Circuit

Electrolux Corporation v. Dustpak, Ltd., Inc., and Anschel Wolf

330 F.2d 958, 141 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 427, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 5459

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 5, 1964

Docket28362_1

StatusPublished

This text of 330 F.2d 958 (Electrolux Corporation v. Dustpak, Ltd., Inc., and Anschel Wolf) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Electrolux Corporation v. Dustpak, Ltd., Inc., and Anschel Wolf, 330 F.2d 958, 141 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 427, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 5459 (2d Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

330 F.2d 958

ELECTROLUX CORPORATION, Appellant,
v.
DUSTPAK, LTD., INC., and Anschel Wolf, Appellees.

No. 421.

Docket 28362.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued May 4, 1964.

Decided May 5, 1964.

Plaintiff-appellant in an action for patent infringement appeals from the decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, John F. Dooling, Jr., J., dismissing the action, after a hearing, on the ground that the patents are invalid.

John T. Kelton, New York City (Watson, Leavenworth, Kelton & Taggart; Elmer R. Helferich; Thomas C. Betts), New York City, for appellant.

Samuel J. Stoll, Jamaica, N. Y., for appellees.

Before WATERMAN, FRIENDLY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the district court dismissing plaintiff's action alleging patent infringement is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Dooling which is reported at 215 F.Supp. 367 (E.D.N.Y.1963).

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