1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 240 F.Supp.
  5. 240 F.Supp. 150 (1965)
 

MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING CO. v. NORTON COMPANY

No. 37154.

240 F.Supp. 150 (1965)

MINNESOTA MINING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. NORTON COMPANY, Studebaker-Packard Corporation, Hadco Corporation, Defendants.

United States District Court N. D. Ohio, E. D.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law March 29, 1965.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Thomas V. Koykka, Arter, Hadden, Wykoff & Van Duzer, Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff, Harold J. Kinney, Stanley G. DeLaHunt, Richard E. Brink, Carpenter, Abbott, Coulter & Kinney, St. Paul, Minn., of counsel.

George H. Rudolph, Jones, Day, Cockley & Reavis, Cleveland, Ohio, for defendant, John W. Malley, Allen Kirkpatrick, Cushman, Darby & Cushman, Washington, D. C., of counsel.

Hugh E. Smith, Troy, N. Y., for defendant Norton Co.

CONNELL, Chief Judge.

The history of this patent begins on February 21, 1957, when the plaintiff filed in the United States Patent Office an application which became Serial No. 641714. On October 8, 1958, the plaintiff filed an application for patent in the names of its employees Howard L. Hoover, Eugene J. Dupre and Walter J. Rankin, Application No. 777,167, which application contained matter related to a certain extent to the subject matter of the earlier application...

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