Triangle Finishing Corp. v. Fair Lawn Finishing Co.

256 F.2d 512
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedJune 17, 1958
DocketNo. 348, Docket 24631
StatusPublished

This text of 256 F.2d 512 (Triangle Finishing Corp. v. Fair Lawn Finishing Co.) 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
Triangle Finishing Corp. v. Fair Lawn Finishing Co., 256 F.2d 512 (2d Cir. 1958).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellants submit that the basic issue is “whether or not the application of rapidly moving air to conditions of Benger type setting, involves inventive combination.” The district court held that it did not because of the wealth of prior analogous art in the use of rapidly moving hot air in the textile industry. We agree and affirm the declaration of invalidity on the opinion of the district judge.

The decree, 142 F.Supp. 575, is modified by eliminating the declaration of non-infringement, which we do not need to pass upon, and as so modified is

Affirmed.

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

Related

Triangle Finishing Corp. v. Fair Lawn Finishing Co.
142 F. Supp. 575 (S.D. New York, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
256 F.2d 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/triangle-finishing-corp-v-fair-lawn-finishing-co-ca2-1958.