Schneider

Intricate Metal Products, Inc. v. Schneider

Good Law
324 F.2d 555·139 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 230
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 28, 1963No. 18372California3,110 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Merrill, J.

Intricate Metal Products, Inc., and Signal Manufacturing Company (both doing business in Los Angeles, California) , both manufactured a metal hardware unit for a foldable sofa-bed. They sold these units to furniture manufacturers who would install the units in frames and upholster them, and then sell upholstered units to retail outlets. The mechanism of Intricate’s unit constituted a substantially exact copy of Signal’s unit.

Charles Schneider holds two patents which, he contends, cover mechanical features which were copied. Signal is his sole licensee. Schneider and Signal have sued, alleging infringement of both patents and unfair competition. The district court rendered judgment in their favor upon all claims. Damages were cumulated and damages for infringement were trebled. A total judgment in the sum of *557 $35,962 resulted. Further infringement was enjoined. Intricate has appealed.

The two patents are: (1). No. 2,-713,690, filed May 12, 1952, and issued July 26, 1955. This has been referred to throughout the proceedings as “No. 690.” (2). No. 2,878,490, filed February 7, 1955, and issued March 25, 1959. This has been referred to as “No. 490.” We shall adopt the…

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.