Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
AMERICAN STEEL FOUNDRIES, Appellant, v. Thomas E. ROBERTSON, Commissioner of Patents, and Simplex Electric Heating Company, Appellees, 1926 — 11 F.2d 999 · caselaw · US
IP
AMERICAN STEEL FOUNDRIES, Appellant, v. Thomas E. ROBERTSON, Commissioner of Patents, and Simplex Electric Heating Company, Appellees
11 F.2d 999·United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·1926
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
AMERICAN STEEL FOUNDRIES, Appellant, v. Thomas E. ROBERTSON, Commissioner of Patents, and Simplex Electric Heating Company, Appellees.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
February 15, 1926.)
No. 3405.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
George L. Wilkinson, of Chicago, Ill., for appellant.
Nathan Heard, of Boston, Mass., for appellee Simplex Electric Heating Co.
Before EVANS and PAGE, Circuit Judges, and LUSE, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Upon the presentation of this appeal to this court, it was deemed advisable to certify three questions to the Supreme Court. On the 4th day of January, 1926, the Supreme Court rendered its opinion (46 S. Ct. 160, 70 L. Ed. -) and answered the submitted questions in appellant’s favor.
On the strength of that opinion, the decree of the District Court is reversed, with directions to grant the relief sought.