Ansley West Corporation v. Elco Corporation, Ansley West Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Elco Corporation, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee

467 F.2d 1170 174 U.S.P.Q. 382 ANSLEY WEST CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ELCO CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. ANSLEY WEST CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, v. ELCO CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee. Nos. 25238, 25375 and 25394. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. July 3, 1972. Nathan Lavine (argued), of Adelman & Lavine, Philadelphia, Pa., Walton Eugene Tinsley, of Harris, Kiech, Russell & Kern, Los Angeles, Cal., David Roy Pressman, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant-appellant. Thomas M. Marshall (argued), New York City, Frank E. Mauritz, of Lyon & Lyon, Miketta, Glenny, Poms & Smith, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee. Before KOELSCH and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges, and COPPLE, * District Judge. KOELSCH, Circuit Judge: 1 The district court held that Claims 1 through 7 of plaintiff's patent (Griswold, U.S. Patent No. 3,155,809, issued November 3, 1964) were valid and infringed. Defendants appeal. 1 We conclude that the claims lack invention on the now statutory ground that ". . . the differences between the subject matter . . . and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious…