UNITED STATES HOFFMAN MACHINERY CORP.

v.

PANTEX PRESSING MACHINE, INC.

Citator

Cited By

• Donner v. Sheer Pharmacal Corp., 64 F.2d 217 (8th Cir. 1933)
  …d. 527; Buchanan v. Wyeth Hdwe. & Mfg. Co. (C. C. A. 8) 47 F.(2d) 704, 706; Graham Paper Co. v. International Paper Co. (C. C. A. 8) 46 F.(2d) 881, 885; Tropic-Aire, Inc., v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (C. C. A. 8) 44 F.(2d) 580, 591, certiorari denied 282 U. S. 904, 51 S. Ct. 217, 75 L. Ed. 796; Zip Mfg. Co. v. Pusch (C. C. A. 8) 2 F.(2d) 828, 831; Acme Foundry & Mach. Co. v. Oil Well Improvements Co. (C. C. A. 8) 2 F.(2d) 530, 531, certiorari denied 268 U. S. 704, 45 S. Ct. 639, 69 L. Ed. 1167; 1 Walker on…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Radtke Patents Corp. v. COE, 122 F.2d 937 (D.C. Cir. 1941)
  …Corp., 10 Cir., 87 F. 2d 26, 28; Eagle v. P. & C. Hand Forged Tool Co., 9 Cir., 74 F. 2d 918, 920; United States Hoffman Machinery Corp. v. Pantex Pressing Mach., Inc., D.C.Del., 35 F. 2d 523, 525, modified, 3 Cir., 44 F. 2d 685, certiorari denied, 282 U.S. 904, 51 S.Ct. 217, 75 L.Ed. 796. Cf. Busell Trimmer Co. v. Stevens, 137 U.S. 423, 433, 11 S.Ct. 150, 34 L.Ed. 719. Cf. also, Detrola Radio & Television Corp. v. Hazeltine Corp., 61 S.Ct. 948, 85 L.Ed. 1319; Minnesota Min. & Mfg. Co. v. Coe, 69 App.D.C.…
• Minn. Mining & MFG. Co. v. COE, 99 F.2d 986 (D.C. Cir. 1938)
  …6 It does not prove invention. “Commercial success, however, cannot supply inventive genius to a device that has none. Ability to sell is not inventive genius.” Tropic-Aire, Inc. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 8 Cir., 44 F. 2d 580, 593, certiorari denied, 282 U.S. 904, 51 S.Ct. 217, 75 L.Ed. 796.17 In Economy Fuse & Mfg. Co. v. Coe, 66 App.D.C. 294, 295, 86 F. 2d 850, 851, we said of the invention there claimed: “While appellant has produced a moldable composition of greater strength than that of Kempton and gre…

  ← 1 / 2 →