Howard Industries, Inc. v. Rae Motor Corporation
Decision Date | 27 May 1959 |
Docket Number | No. 12568.,12568. |
Parties | HOWARD INDUSTRIES, INC., a Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RAE MOTOR CORPORATION, a Corporation, Defendant-Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Jerome J. Foley, Rex Capwell, Jr., Racine, Wis., George J. Kuehnl, Racine, Wis., for appellant.
Carroll R. Heft, Glenn R. Coates, Racine, Wis., for appellee.
Before DUFFY, Chief Judge, and SCHNACKENBERG and PARKINSON, Circuit Judges.
Plaintiff-appellee Howard Industries, Inc. (Howard) filed this action in the District Court to enjoin the defendant-appellant Rae Motor Corporation (Rae) from manufacturing, using or marketing its electric motors in a motor casing confusingly similar in appearance to that of Howard, and for damages.
The District Court, by pre-trial conference order, separated the issues on liability and damages and, following a bench trial on the question of liability, filed findings of fact and conclusions of law and entered an injunctive order and judgment in accordance therewith in favor of Howard. This appeal followed.
The relevant undisputed facts are that in 1945 Howard purchased the assets of Electric Motor Corporation, a manufacturer of fractional horsepower motors, which included Patent No. 2,032,084. Shortly thereafter certain personnel formerly of Electric Motor Corporation left Howard and organized Rae. By early spring of 1946 Rae was manufacturing and selling fractional horsepower motors, which infringed Howard's patent, housed in a motor casing identical to that of Howard, except the brushes within the Rae casing were welded thereto while in the Howard casing they were attached by crimping.
Thereupon Howard filed a patent infringement action against Rae and one Dunham. Prior to trial the parties entered into a settlement agreement and the infringement suit was dismissed. The settlement agreement is as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Superior Electric Company v. GENERAL RADIO CORPORATION
...and infringement, the parties are entitled to a plenary trial unless no genuine dispute appears. Cf. Howard Industries, Inc. v. Rae Motor Corporation, 7 Cir., 1959, 267 F.2d 430. The motion before me invokes the exercise of my sound discretion. Injunctive relief such as the defendant here s......
-
Howard Industries, Inc. v. Rae Motor Corporation
...of Howard and against Rae. Howard Industries, Inc. v. Rae Motor Corp., D. C., 165 F.Supp. 646. This Court upon appeal by Rae affirmed, 267 F.2d 430.1 Following the adjudication of Rae's liability, a Special Master was appointed to ascertain damages sustained by Howard. The Master's ascertai......
-
Howard Industries, Inc. v. Rae Motor Corporation
...in a finding for the plaintiff. See Howard Industries, Inc. v. Rae Motor Corporation, D.C.E.D.Wis.1958, 165 F.Supp. 646, affirmed 7 Cir., 267 F.2d 430, in regard to this question and for the factual background of the Thereafter the issue of damages was referred to a master who found that pl......
-
Table Of Cases
...826 (2002), 161, 191. Honeywell Int’l v. Universal Avionics Sys., 488 F.3d 982 (Fed. Cir. 2007), 154. Howard Indus., Inc. v. Rae Motor, 267 F.2d 430 (7th Cir. 1959), 199. In re Howarth, 654 F.2d 103 (C.C.P.A. 1981), 48. Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Comfortex Corp., 44 F. Supp. 2d 145 (N.D.N.Y. 1......
-
Settlement of Patent Litigation
...1964); Boston Scientific Corp. v. Schneider (Eur.) AG, 983 F. Supp. 245, 271 (D. Mass. 1997); see also Howard Indus. v. Rae Motor Corp., 267 F.2d 430, 434 (7th Cir. 1959) (settlement did not prevent alleged infringer from making the same product as long as it was not “confusingly similar in......