U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 1929

Gibson v. Eastern Rim & Wheel Co.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Decided January 21, 1929

32 F.2d 774; 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 3883 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

E. Hayward Fairbanks, of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant., Charles Neave, of New York City, Albert L. Ely, of Akron, Ohio, and Benjamin O. Frick, of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

S. S. Kresge Co. v. Winget Kickernick Co. (8th Cir. 1938)
Gotz v. Universal Products Co. (United States District Court for the District of Delaware 1938)
Bocz v. Hudson Motor Car Co. (District Court, E.D. Michigan 1937)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The underlying question in this ease was the validity of tile patent involved’ because of the novelty of its alleged invention. No principles of law are involved.

The court below discussed the questions involved with unusual detail and thoroughness in an exhaustive opinion. The court has had the benefit of an equally thorough presentation of the ease by counsel for plaintiff in oral argument and comprehensive brief, but such presentation and our own study of the record fails to convince us the trial judge was in error. In view of his able opinion, and finding ourselves in accord therewith, we adopt it as expressive of our view and limit ourselves to affirming the deeree based upon it.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.