149 MADISON AVENUE CORP. ET AL.

v.

ASSELTA ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. United States, 288 F.2d 904 (Ct. Cl. 1961)
  …nts and title passes to the customer, the price at which the container is billed is deemed to be income at the time of sale. Okonite Co. v. Commissioner, 1945, 4 T.C. 618, affirmed on other issues 3 Cir., 1946, 155 F. 2d 248, certiorari denied 1946, 329 U.S. 764, 67 S.Ct. 125, 91 L.Ed. 658. This rule applies even if the manufacturer has agreed to repurchase the container at the same price. La Salle Ce [*907] ment Co. v. Commissioner, 7 Cir., 59 F. 2d 361, certiorari denied La Salle Cement Co. v. Burnet, 19…
• Smith v. Gen. Foundry Mach. Co., Inc., 174 F.2d 147 (4th Cir. 1949)
  …ons. Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186, 14 S.Ct. 310, 38 L.Ed. 121; Victor Cooler Door Co., Inc. v. Jamison Cold Storage Door Co., 4 Cir., 44 F. 2d 288; Wheeling Stamping Co. v. Standard Cap & Molding Co., 4 Cir., 155 F. 2d 6, certiorari denied 329 U.S. 764, 67 S.Ct. 125, 91 L.Ed. 658. The principles governing the ques,tion of infringement are well established and when they are applied to the facts of this case, it becomes clear that the defendant does not employ the system that the plaintiff has devi…
• Marvel Specialty Co., Inc. v. Bell Hosiery Hills, Inc., 330 F.2d 164 (4th Cir. 1964)
  …ich is impossible to construct and use. It is true, as .defendant asserts, that patent claims should -be interpreted in light of the specifications. See, e. g., Wheeling Stamping Co. v. Standard Cap & Molding Co., 155 F. 2d 6 (4 Cir.), cert. denied, 329 U.S. 764, 67 S.Ct. 125, 91 L.Ed. 658 (1946). Here, however, we cannot assign such significance to the erroneous portion of the specifications. Apparently, Brown originally misconceived the method by which his invention operated but there is nothing in eith…