Blumcraft of Pittsburgh v. Architectural Art Mfg., Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Blumcraft of Pittsburgh v. Architectural Art Mfg., Inc., 459 F.2d 482 (10th Cir. 1972)
174 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 384

Blumcraft of Pittsburgh v. Architectural Art Mfg., Inc.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to Rule 8, Revised Rules of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (1970), the appellees have filed a motion to affirm and a persuasive memorandum in support of the motion. The appellant has responded to the motion in a memorandum addressing the underlying issue, opposing the motion.

We have now carefully and thoroughly reviewed the files and records in this cause, together with the papers filed, and are convinced that the judgment of the district court is correct. Concluding that there is no need for further argument in this matter, the motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed for the reasons stated by the district court, reported at 337 F.Supp. 853 (D.C.Kan., 1972).

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
BLUMCRAFT OF PITTSBURGH, a Partnership consisting of Hyman Blum, Max Blum, Louis Blum and Harry P. Blum v. ARCHITECTURAL ART MFG., INC. and Wenzel W. Thom
Status
Published