Case Name: ROBESON PROCESS CO., Appellant, v. Jacob S. ROBESON et al., Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1924-10-06
Citations: 1 F.2d 1022
Docket Number: No. 3143
Parties: ROBESON PROCESS CO., Appellant, v. Jacob S. ROBESON et al., Appellees.
Judges: Before WOOLLEY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and MORRIS, District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 1
Pages: 1022–1023

Head Matter:
ROBESON PROCESS CO., Appellant, v. Jacob S. ROBESON et al., Appellees.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
October 6, 1924.
Rehearing Denied December 2, 1924.)
No. 3143.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the 'District of New Jersey; Wm. N. Runyon, Judge.
A. Dayton Oliphant, of Trenton, N. J. (A. M. Houghton, of Washington, D. C., and D. A. Woodcock and F. P. Warfield, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellant. Dean, Fairbank, Obrieght & Hirsch, of New York City (Clair W. Fair-bank and Irving M. Obrieght, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellees.
Before WOOLLEY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and MORRIS, District Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a decree dismissing a bill charging infringement of two patents — Robeson, No. 833,634, and Robeson, No. 3,069,029 — owned by the appellant. 293 F. 70. A mature consideration of the record, the briefs, and the thoughts advanced at the oral argument has convinced us that in the decree appealed .from, there is no error. The full and careful analysis and treatment of the issues of the ease by the court below, with those opinion we are also in accord, makes unprofitable and unnecessary a comprehensive restatement or rediseussion of the case by this court. The decree must be affirmed.