Opinion
No. 19495.
August 8, 1963.
Donald L. Peltier, Robert D. Morvant, Thibodaux, La., Raymond J. Mawhinney, Washington, D.C., W.D. Keith, New York City, Paul G. Borron, Jr., Plaquemine, La., Peltier Peltier, Thibodaux, La., Borron, Owen, Borron Delahaye, Plaquemine, La., Wilkinson, Mawhinney Theibault, Washington, D.C., Keith, Bolger, Isner Byrne, New York City, A. Robert Theibault, Washington, D.C., for appellants.
B.F. Garvey, Bartholomew Diggins, Washington, D.C., Edmond L. Deramee, Deramee Deramee, Thibodaux, La., Diggins LeBlanc, Garvey Garvey, Washington, D.C., for defendants-appellees and cross-appellants, LaRose and Clause and others.
Before RIVES and WISDOM, Circuit Judges, and BOOTLE, District Judge.
This appeal involves the validity and infringement of two patents, the first on a method, and the second on an apparatus 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.
Both issued to Royal J. LaRose and Edward P. Clause, the first numbered 2,799,984 and dated July 23, 1957, and the second numbered 2,871,645, dated February 3, 1959.
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.