General Electric Co. v. Parr Electric Co.

Full title: GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. v. PARR ELECTRIC CO., Inc

Court: Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Nov 7, 1938

99 F.2d 827 (2d Cir. 1938)

Opinion

No. 358.

November 7, 1938.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York.

On reargument.

Decree of District Court modified.

For original opinion, see 98 F.2d 60.

Stephen H. Philbin, of New York City (Harrison F. Lyman and Edgar H. Kent, both of Boston, Mass., of counsel), for appellant.

Pennie, Davis, Marvin Edmonds, of New York City, and Lawrence C. Kingsland and Edmund C. Rogers, both of St. Louis, Mo. (Estill E. Ezell, of St. Louis, Mo., of counsel), for appellee.

Before MANTON, SWAN, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The decree of the district court is modified.

SWAN, Circuit Judge (dissenting).

In my opinion the decree should be affirmed. I believe that the claim is too indefinite to be valid under the doctrine of General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp., 304 U.S. 364, 58 S.Ct. 899, 82 L.Ed. 1402. I think also that the Carlson fan is an anticipation.