Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

74 F.2d 1019

Docket No. 5463.

Rogers v. Alemite Corp.

Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Dec. 18, 1934.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 25, 1935.

Third Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1934-12-18

2 counsel of record

Relies on Bassick Mfg. Co. v. Adams Grease Gun Corp. · Alemite Corp. v. Rogers

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1934-12-18

¶1Charles M. Clarke, Clarke & Doolittle, W. G. Doolittle, and James Roy Van Kirk, all of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellants.

¶2Lynn A. Williams and Albin C. Ahlberg, both of Chicago, 111., and Frank B. Fox, of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.

¶3Before BUFFINGTON, WOOLLEY, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5In this case, infringement, by the defendants, of certain claims of patent No. 1,307,-734, granted to Gullborg, was charged. On final hearing, the court held the patent valid and infringed.

¶6The mechanism of the patent involved is described at length in Bassick Mfg. Co. v. Adams Grease Gun Corporation (C. C. A.) 52 F.(2d) 36, and reference thereto saves needless repetition. The questions involved in the present case were discussed by the court below in its opinion, and, as no new principle of patent law is involved and we find no error in that court’s view, we limit ourselves to affirming the case on the opinion of the trial judge (Alemite Corporation v. Rogers, 5 F. Supp. 940).

/74/f2d/1019 · .json · Public domain