1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 69 F.Supp.
  5. 69 F.Supp. 555 (1946)
 

PYRENE MFG. CO. v. URQUHART

Civ. A. No. 3149.

69 F.Supp. 555 (1946)

PYRENE MFG. CO. v. URQUHART et al.

District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

September 10, 1946.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Charles H. Howson, of Philadelphia, Pa., and Maxwell Barus and John B. Cuningham, both of New York City, for plaintiff.

William A. Gray, of Philadelphia, Pa., Arthur G. Connolly, of Wilmington, Del., and J. Matthews Neale, of Washington, D. C., for defendant.

KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.

This action, by Pyrene Manufacturing Company against Radcliffe M. and George G. Urquhart, is for a declaratory judgment that United States patents Nos. 2,106,043, issued January 18, 1938, and 2,198,585, issued April 23, 1940, to the Urquharts, are invalid and not infringed. There is a counterclaim for infringement.

The patents are for method and apparatus for generating and throwing fire-extinguishing foam. The usefulness of foam...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases