Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

American Saint Gobain Corporation v. Armstrong Glass Company, Inc., 19657 (1969)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Number: 19657 Visitors: 10
Filed: Sep. 29, 1969
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 418 F.2d 571 163 U.S.P.Q. 193 AMERICAN SAINT GOBAIN CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARMSTRONG GLASS COMPANY, Inc., Defendant-Appellant. No. 19657. United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit. Sept. 29, 1969. Edwin M. Luedeka, Paul E. Hodges, Knoxville, Tenn., on memorandum in opposition to motion to dismiss, Ferdinand Powell, Jr., Epps, Powell, Weller, Taylor & Miller, Johnson City, Tenn., for appellant. Hunter, Smith, Davis, Norris Waddey & Treadway, Ernest F. Smith, Kingsport, Tenn., on b
More

418 F.2d 571

163 U.S.P.Q. 193

AMERICAN SAINT GOBAIN CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ARMSTRONG GLASS COMPANY, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 19657.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

Sept. 29, 1969.

Edwin M. Luedeka, Paul E. Hodges, Knoxville, Tenn., on memorandum in opposition to motion to dismiss, Ferdinand Powell, Jr., Epps, Powell, Weller, Taylor & Miller, Johnson City, Tenn., for appellant.

Hunter, Smith, Davis, Norris Waddey & Treadway, Ernest F. Smith, Kingsport, Tenn., on brief in support of motion to dismiss; Pennie, Edmonds, Morton, Taylor & Adams, Robert J. Kadel, Berj A. Terzian, Satterlee, Warfield & Stephens, New York City, of counsel, for appellee.

Before EDWARDS, CELEBREZZE and PECK, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

1

On consideration of plaintiff-appellee's motion to dismiss this appeal and the briefs and records in this proceeding; and

2

Noting that the District Judge's Order, filed April 24, 1969, was a reference to a Special Master and specifically retained jurisdiction over the contempt proceeding, and hence was not a final order; and

3

Further, noting that the order was not of the class of 'judgments in civil actions for patent infringement which are final except for accounting' within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 1292(a)(4), (1964), but rather was an interlocutory order in a contempt proceeding (see International Silver Co. v. Oneida Community, Ltd., 93 F.2d 437 (2d Cir. 1937)),

4

Said motion to dismiss the appeal is hereby granted. Rule 8, Rules of the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer