Thomson Machinery Co. v. LaRose

320 F.2d 218, 138 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 541
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedAugust 8, 1963
DocketNo. 19495
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 320 F.2d 218 (Thomson Machinery Co. v. LaRose) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Thomson Machinery Co. v. LaRose, 320 F.2d 218, 138 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 541 (5th Cir. 1963).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal involves, the validity and infringement of two patents,1 the first on a method, and the second on an ap-> paratus for mechanically handling sugar cane stalks during harvesting. The learned district judge, Honorable J. Skelly Wright, now a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in a brilliantly worded opinion reported at 197 F.Supp. 636, et seq., held both claims of the method patent invalid and the first three claims of the apparatus patent invalid, but the fourth claim of the apparatus patent valid and infringed.

After careful study and consideration, we agree with the result reached by the district court and substantially for the reasons stated in its opinion. The judgment is therefore

Affirmed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
320 F.2d 218, 138 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 541, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomson-machinery-co-v-larose-ca5-1963.