U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 1956

Carl-Mayer Corp. v. Foundry Equipment Co.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Decided April 30, 1956 · McAllister, Miller, Simons

233 F.2d 179; 110 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 169; 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 5381 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

McCoy, Greene & TeGrotenhuis, Benjamin C. Boer, Cleveland, Ohio, for appellant., Oberlin & Limbach, Lawrence C. Spieth, Cleveland, Ohio, for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Carl-Mayer Corporation v. The Foundry Equipment Company, the Foundry Equipment Company v. Carl-Mayer Corporation (6th Cir. 1956)

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.

These two suits involve the validity of Patent No. 1,934,904 for a vertical core oven used in baking foundry cores, and the validity of Patent No. 2,257,180 for the same type of device. The district court found that the first patent was invalid for want of invention; and that the second patent was also invalid for want of invention and in view of anticipation by prior art. The complicated factual situation was analyzed and set forth with exceptional clarity in his opinion by the late Judge Freed; and upon a review of the briefs and record, we concur in his opinion and decision, which were adopted as the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the district court in Foundry Equipment Co. v. Carl-Mayer Corporation, 128 F.Supp. 640.

In accordance with the foregoing, the judgments of the district court are affirmed.

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