Six-Way Corporation v. McCurdy

3 Citing cases

  1. Dow Chemical v. Williams Bros. Well Treating

    81 F.2d 495 (10th Cir. 1936)   Cited 22 times

    ) 4 F.2d 118, 120; West v. Premier Register Table Co. (C.C.A. 1) 27 F.2d 653; Doughnut Machine Corp. v. Demco, Inc. (D.C.Md.) 51 F.2d 364, 370; Allied Metal Stamping Co., Inc. v. Standard Electric Equipment Corp. (D.C.N.Y.) 57 F.2d 296, 302; Kny-Scheerer Corp. v. American Sterilizer Co. (D.C.) 5 F. Supp. 273, 276; Universal Oil Products Co. v. Winkler-Koch Engineering Co. (D.C.N.Y.) 6 F. Supp. 763, 770; Six-Way Corp. v. McCurdy Co. (D.C.N.Y.) 11 F. Supp. 734, 737; Royal Lace Paper Works v. U.S. Lace Paper Works, Inc. (D.C.N.Y.) 11 F. Supp. 15, 17; Catalin Corp. v. Catalazuli Mfg. Co. (C.C.A. 2) 79 F.2d 593. See, also, Walker on Patents, § 107. (b) The Muskegon Idea.

  2. Heyer v. Allen Elec.s&sEquipment Co.

    37 F. Supp. 455 (W.D. Mich. 1939)   Cited 1 times

    It is therefore invalid. This conclusion is supported by the following authorities: Elite Mfg. Co. v. Ashland Mfg. Co., 6 Cir., 235 F. 893; Imperial Glass Co. v. A. H. Heisey & Co., 6 Cir., 294 F. 267; Applied Arts Corp. v. Grand Rapids Metalcraft Corp., 6 Cir., 67 F.2d 428; Kanne & Bessant v. Eaglelet Metal Spinning Co., D.C., 54 F.2d 131; Boston Leather Specialty Co. v. Vatco Mfg. Co., D.C., 17 F.Supp. 910; Six-Way Corporation v. McCurdy & Co., D.C., 11 F.Supp. 734.         In the Elite Mfg. Co. case, supra, 235 F. page 896, the following is pertinent, 'The production of such a design did not call for an exercise of the creative faculty.

  3. General Electric Co. v. Parr Electric Co.

    21 F. Supp. 471 (E.D.N.Y. 1937)   Cited 3 times

    It is no new invention to use an old machine for a new purpose. Six-Way Corporation v. McCurdy Co., Inc. (C.C.A.) 85 F.2d 5. The "Silver Swan" fan does not infringe claims 8, 9, or 17 of the Upson patent in suit; therefore, the question of their validity need not be considered.