Jenkins Metal Shops, Inc. v. Pneumafil Corporation
427 F.2d 144, 166 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 454, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8816
Opinion
Upon a copious record and after observing the accused machine in operation, the District Judge concluded that the device does not infringe appellant’s patent. We have reviewed the record and are in accord with the Judge’s findings and conclusions. For the reasons stated in the District Court’s opinion, 303 F.Supp. 653 (W.D.N.C.1969), its judgment is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Jenkins Metal Shops, Inc. v. Pneumafil Corporation, 427 F.2d 144, 166 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 454, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8816 (4th Cir. 1970).
427 F.2d 144 (Jenkins Metal Shops, Inc. v. Pneumafil Corporation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Whitehall Corp. v. Western Geophysical Co. of America
664 F. Supp. 1056 (S.D. Texas, 1986)
Jerry F. Connell, Gary F. Burns and Conelco, Inc., Appellants/cross-Appellees v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., a Corporation, Appellee/cross-Appellant
722 F.2d 1542 (Federal Circuit, 1983)
Sterner Lighting, Inc. v. Allied Electrical Supply, Inc.
431 F.2d 539 (Fifth Circuit, 1970)