Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co. v. Walker

149 F.2d 896, 65 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 586, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 4527
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided June 12, 1945·No. No. 10513·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

In its petition for rehearing appellant, Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Company, assumes that the court in ruling on Walker’s patent No. 2,156.519 failed to consider the cases of General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corporation, 304 U.S. 364, 58 S.Ct. 899, 82 L.Ed. 1402, and Davis Sewing Mach. Co. v. New Departure Mfg. Co., 6 Cir., 217 F. 775, particularly the first of these decisions. Halliburton is mistaken. In the General Electric case the claim considered was not one for a combination of elements, but a claim for a single element. Here, the claims are for a combination of elements. They sufficiently define the limits of the invention- to enable those having knowledge of acoustics and of the principles of the physics of sound to determine what is covered and what is beyond the scope of the claimed invention.

Petition for rehearing is denied.

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

Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co. v. Walker, 149 F.2d 896, 65 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 586, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 4527 (9th Cir. 1945).

149 F.2d 896 (Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co. v. Walker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co. v. Walker
329 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1946)