Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Cuno Engineering Corp. Vs. Automatic Devices Corp.

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Nov 10, 1941

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

42 entries 11 linked 31 unlinked
Show
  1. Pickering Vs. Mccullough US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1881
  2. Thatcher Heating Co. Vs. Burtis US Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1887
  3. Concrete Appliances Co. Vs. Gomery US Supreme Court · Nov 16, 1925
  4. Thompson Vs. Boisselier US Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1885
  5. Phillips Vs. Detroit US Supreme Court · May 05, 1884
  6. Morris Vs. Mcmillin US Supreme Court · Nov 17, 1884
  7. Honolulu Oil Corp. Vs. Halliburton US Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1939
  8. Reckendorfer Vs. Faber US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1875
  9. Hicks Vs. Kelsey US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1873
  10. Atlantic Works Vs. Brady US Supreme Court · Mar 05, 1883
  11. Winans Vs. Denmead US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1853
  12. Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic
    Search
  13. Devices Corp. - 314 U.S. 84 (1941) U.S. Supreme Court Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic
    Search
  14. Devices Corp., 314 U.S. 84 (1941) Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic
    Search
  15. and 11 of the Mead patent are valid, because of a conflict between the decision below and Automatic Devices Corp. v. Sinko
    Search
  16. and unsuccessful that a construction of the claims broad enough to include it is not permissible. See Deering v. Winona
    Search
  17. Altoona Publix Theaters, Inc. v. American
    Search
  18. art. More must be done than to utilize the skill of the art in bringing old tools into new combinations. Hailes v. Van
    Search
  19. Powers-Kennedy Contracting Corp. v. Concrete
    Search
  20. Carbice Corp. v. American
    Search
  21. U. S. 1 , 114 U. S. 11 . Since Hotchkiss v. Greenwood
    Search
  22. position of a patent, more ingenuity must be involved than the work of a mechanic skilled in the art. Hicks v. Kelsey
    Search
  23. Slawson v. Grand
    Search
  24. Saranac Automatic Machine Corp. v. Wirebounds
    Search
  25. the Hotchkiss case applies to the adaptation or combination of old or well known devices for new uses. Phillips v. Detroit
    Search
  26. Electric Cable Joint Co. v. Brooklyn
    Search
  27. Textile Machine Works v. Louis
    Search
  28. Toledo Pressed Steel Co. v. Standard
    Search
  29. lighter to produce a more efficient, useful, and convenient article. Cf. Electric Cable Joint Co. v. Brooklyn
    Search
  30. Blake v. San
    Search
  31. U. S. 683 ), even though the new result had not before been contemplated. Pennsylvania R. Co. Co. v. Locomotive
    Search
  32. art. The consequences of the alternative course were forcefully pointed out by Mr. Justice Bradley in Atlantic Works v. Brady
    Search
  33. Cf. Mr. Justice Campbell dissenting in Winans v. Denmead
    Search
  34. Some of these are reviewed in Casco Products Corp. v. Sinko
    Search
  35. U.S. Supreme Court Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic
    Search
  36. and Automatic Devices Corp. v. Sinko
    Search
  37. See Deering v. Winona
    Search
  38. Hailes v. Van
    Search
  39. Since Hotchkiss v. Greenwood
    Search
  40. Cf. Electric Cable Joint Co. v. Brooklyn
    Search
  41. Pennsylvania R. Co. Co. v. Locomotive
    Search
  42. Casco Products Corp. v. Sinko
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial