Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

TENSITRON, INC., Appellant, v. Da

PER CURIAM:

We affirm Judge Dooling's finding that Tensitron's tension meter was "obvious" within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103 and therefore not patentable. His well reasoned opinion is reported at 260 F. Supp. 457 (1966). It is unnecessary, therefore, for us to pass upon his finding that Bromley's device infringed claims 2, 3, 5, and 6 of Tensitron's patent.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

TENSITRON, INC. v. BROMLEY
(Nov 3, 1966)