GENERAL TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Company
Citation | 351 F. Supp. 872 |
Decision Date | 03 October 1972 |
Docket Number | C 67-206.,No. C 36799,C 36799 |
Parties | The GENERAL TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. The FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Defendant. The FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. The GENERAL TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Defendant. |
Court | United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Ohio |
Pursuant to the order of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the accompanying judgment order amends the final paragraph of this Court's memorandum opinion and order of June 26, 1972, 349 F.Supp. 345.
It is so ordered.
It is hereby ordered and adjudged:
1. That this Court has jurisdiction of the parties and subject matter of these actions.
2. That United States Letters Patent No. 2,964,083 was duly and lawfully issued and has since been owned by the General Tire and Rubber Company.
3. That claims 1, 3-5, 7, 13, 14, 17-19 and 22 of said patent in suit, the representative claims here in issue, are in all respects valid and enforceable.
4. That Stock A, Blend 2 and Blend 5, the representative tread stocks here in issue, infringe each of representative claims 13, 14, 17-19 and 22 and when applied as the vulcanized tread portion of a pneumatic tire they infringe each of representative claims 1, 3-5, and 7.
5. That the subject matter of said patent in suit is not and has never been licensed to the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, either expressly or impliedly.
6. That a writ of injunction issue out of and under the seal of this Court, directed to the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, its officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, successors, assigns, and those in privity with them, enjoining and restraining them from directly or indirectly infringing claims 1, 3-5, 7, 13, 14, 17-19 and 22 of United States Letters Patent No. 2,964,083, and from inducing, aiding, abetting, advertising, or in any way contributing to the infringement of said patent claims.
7. That the General Tire and Rubber Company recover from the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company the damages to which it is entitled by law for the infringement of said patent in suit, together with such attorneys' fees, punative damages, expenses, costs and interest as after the report of the Special Master may be determined and awarded by this Court.
8. That these actions are hereby referred to a Special Master to be designated by this Court to make and render an accounting as to the extent of infringement by defendant of said ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Congoleum Industries, Inc. v. Armstrong Cork Company, Civ. A. No. 41762.
...foreclosed by paragraph 12(b) could not come into existence until January 1, 1973. Armstrong, citing General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tire Co., 351 F. Supp. 872 (N.D.Ohio 1972), contends that the termination of the agreement makes no difference with respect to whether the agreement co......
-
General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
...Cleveland, Ohio, Stanley M. Clark, David A. Thomas, Akron, Ohio, for Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. Judgment Order October 3, 1972. See 351 F.Supp. 872. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND BATTISTI, Chief Judge. This is a rather complex patent case, perhaps the most protracted in existence anywhere in the ......
-
Johns-Manville Corp. v. Guardian Industries Corp.
...four corners of a single reference." General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 349 F.Supp. 345, 356, modified, 351 F.Supp. 872 (N.D. Ohio 1972), modified, 489 F.2d 1105 (6th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932, 94 S.Ct. 2643, 41 L.Ed.2d 235 Guardian makes a convoluted two-......
-
Taussig v. JACK & JILL ONE HOUR CLEANERS, ETC.
...could be made out from the reference. General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 349 F.Supp. 345, 356, modified, 351 F.Supp. 872 (N.D.Ohio 1972), aff'd in pertinent part, rev'd in part, and vacated in part, 489 F.2d 1105 (6th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932, 94 S.Ct. 2......