Owen

Owen v. Perkins Oil Well Cementing Co.

Good Law
2 F.2d 247·1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2022
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 10, 1924No. 4275California779 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rudkin, J.

On the 27th day of August, 1923, a preliminary injunction was granted in a suit instituted by the appellee for infringement of letters patent for a method of cementing oil wells. On March 3, 1924, the appellant was adjudged guilty of contempt for a violation of the injunction thus granted, and soon thereafter moved the court to dissolve the preliminary injunction, as interpreted and construed on the hearing of the contempt proceeding. The motion was denied, and the present appeal is prosecuted from the interlocutory order or decree refusing to dissolve the injunction. The principal controversy in the case arises out of the second claim of tho patent, which reads as follows:

“The method of cementing oil wells which consists of forcing cement down through the regular well easing by means of water pressure, the water being separated from the cement by a suitable barrier, forcing the cement up outside the easing, and holding the cement in position under the water pressure until the cement hardens.”

Tho appellant contends that the method employed by him does not infringe, first, because he uses mud instead of water; second, because he does not use a barrier to separate the water from…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.