WRIGHT
v.
DOWD, WARDEN; BRANCH V. ALVIS, WARDEN; AND MULLINS V. ALVIS, WARDEN, ET AL.

U.S. | 1958-11-10
Nos. 273; No. 279; No. 292
358 U.S. 876 Supreme Court of the United States (1958) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion

Full opinion text not available for this case.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Coast Metals, Inc. v. Wall Colmonoy Corp., 315 F.2d 416 (9th Cir. 1963)
    …hat Wall Colmonoy’s alloy, “Nicrobraz 130”, infringes certain claims of its patent. However, before there can be an infringement there must be a valid patent. Diversey Corp. v. Charles Pfizer & Co., 7 Cir., 1958, 255 F. 2d 60, certiorari dismissed, 358 U.S. 876, 79 S.Ct. 116, 3 L.Ed.2d 106. It therefore becomes evident that if the trial court’s Findings of Fact Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, upon which its conclusion of invalidity of this patent is based, are correct, we need not examine the infringement issue pe…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw