National Metal Molding Co. v. Tubular Woven Fabric Co.

First Circuit

National Metal Molding Co. v. Tubular Woven Fabric Co.

261 F. 924, 1919 U.S. App. LEXIS 1871

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedDecember 16, 1919

DocketNo. 1421

StatusPublished

This text of 261 F. 924 (National Metal Molding Co. v. Tubular Woven Fabric Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

National Metal Molding Co. v. Tubular Woven Fabric Co., 261 F. 924, 1919 U.S. App. LEXIS 1871 (1st Cir. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner (defendant below) now seeks to have this court reverse its decision as to the Osburn patent, held valid by this court, Putnam, Dodge and Bingham, JJ. (opinion by Bingham, J.), in 227 Fed. 884, 142 C. C. A. 408, decided on November 20, 1915. A petition for rehearing was deniéd by this court. The defendant’s application to the Supreme Court for certiorari was denied by that court. 241 U. S. 663, 36 Sup. Ct. 450, 60 L. Ed. 1227. This patent was, by necessary implication, again sustained by this court, Dodge, Bingham and Aldrich, JJ. (opinion by Aldrich, J.), in 254 Fed. 304, 166 C. C. A. 44. The court, as now constituted, remains content with those decisions and opinions.

We cannot adopt the view of petitioner’s counsel as to the meaning, and application to the issue in this case, of the decision and opinion of the Supreme Court in Werk v. Parker, 249 U. S. 130, 39 Sup. Ct. 197, 63 L. Ed. 514. We see nothing in that case which would have led this court to any different conclusion as to the validity of the Osburn patent, or which would now warrant this court in reconsidering a decision made four years ago.

Petition denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner (defendant below) now seeks to have this court reverse its decision as to the Osburn patent, held valid by this court, Putnam, Dodge and Bingham, JJ. (opinion by Bingham, J.), in 227 Fed. 884, 142 C. C. A. 408, decided on November 20, 1915. A petition for rehearing was deniéd by this court. The defendant’s application to the Supreme Court for certiorari was denied by that court. 241 U. S. 663, 36 Sup. Ct. 450, 60 L. Ed. 1227. This patent was, by necessary implication, again sustained by this court, Dodge, Bingham and Aldrich, JJ. (opinion by Aldrich, J.), in 254 Fed. 304, 166 C. C. A. 44. The court, as now constituted, remains content with those decisions and opinions.

We cannot adopt the view of petitioner’s counsel as to the meaning, and application to the issue in this case, of the decision and opinion of the Supreme Court in Werk v. Parker, 249 U. S. 130, 39 Sup. Ct. 197, 63 L. Ed. 514. We see nothing in that case which would have led this court to any different conclusion as to the validity of the Osburn patent, or which would now warrant this court in reconsidering a decision made four years ago.

Petition denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 F. 924, 1919 U.S. App. LEXIS 1871, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-metal-molding-co-v-tubular-woven-fabric-co-ca1-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack