From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Micro-Magnetic Industries, Inc. v. Ardac, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 2, 1973
488 F.2d 770 (9th Cir. 1973)

Opinion

No. 72-2714.

November 2, 1973.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Stanley A. Weigel, Judge.

Carl Hoppe (argued), San Francisco, Cal., Edwin W. Oldham, Akron, Ohio, for appellants.

Karl A. Limbach (argued), Limbach, Limbach Sutton, Jesse Feldman, Feldman, Waldman Kline, San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

Before CHAMBERS and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges, and SKOPIL, District Judge.

Honorable Otto R. Skopil, Jr., United States District Judge, District of Oregon, sitting by designation.


Appellee, Micro-Magnetic Industries, Inc., sued appellants, Ardac, Inc. and its subsidiaries, for infringement of United States Patent No. 2,964,641, referred to as the Selgin II patent.

The suit upon the Selgin II invention was tried before the court which found that the Ardac machine infringed Claims 1, 4 and 5 of United States Patent No. 2,964,641. The court enjoined the defendants from infringing Claims 1, 4 and 5 without a license from Micro-Magnetic, and awarded damages for infringement based upon four percent of the price of Ardac's machine. Ardac appeals from that judgment.

Having reviewed the record, we have concluded that the trial court's findings of fact are clearly supported by the evidence. We agree with the trial judge's opinion and affirm the case on the authority thereof. That opinion is reported at 372 F. Supp. 477 (D.C. 1972).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Micro-Magnetic Industries, Inc. v. Ardac, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 2, 1973
488 F.2d 770 (9th Cir. 1973)
Case details for

Micro-Magnetic Industries, Inc. v. Ardac, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MICRO-MAGNETIC INDUSTRIES, INC., APPELLEE, v. ARDAC, INC., ET AL.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Nov 2, 1973

Citations

488 F.2d 770 (9th Cir. 1973)

Citing Cases

Micro-Magnetic Ind. v. Advance Auto. Sales Co.

This is a cross-appeal in a suit for patent infringement. See Micro-Magnetic Industries v. Advance Automatic…

In re Yarn Processing Patent Validity

The court could then hear proof on the merits and determine whether the case came within the experimental…