Case Name: BINKS MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellant, v. The SPEE-FLO MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1968-04-18
Citations: 392 F.2d 585
Docket Number: No. 24851
Parties: BINKS MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellant, v. The SPEE-FLO MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 392
Pages: 585–586

Head Matter:
BINKS MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellant, v. The SPEE-FLO MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, Appellee.
No. 24851.
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.
April 18, 1968.
Tom Arnold, Houston, Tex., Thomas R. Juettner, Chicago, 111., Arnold, Roylanee, Kruger & Durkee, Houston, Tex., for appellant.
Edward C. Hutcheson, Houston, Tex., Harold F. McNenny, Cleveland, Ohio, McNenny, Farrington, Pearne & Gordon, Cleveland, Ohio, Hutcheson, Taliaferro & Hutcheson, Houston, Tex., of counsel, for appellee.
Before COLEMAN and CLAYTON, Circuit Judges, and JOHNSON, District Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Spee-Flo Manufacturing Company, appellee, charged Sinks Manufacturing Company, appellant, with infringement of Spee-Flo patent number 3,000,576. The District Court found the patent valid and infringed. The opinion of the District Court is published at 264 F.Supp. 542 (1967).
Although most favorably impressed by the brilliant argument of counsel for ap pellant, presented both orally and in briefs, we are nevertheless convinced that the District Judge was right. We see no necessity for duplication of or further comment on the opinion below.
The judgment, therefore, will be affirmed and the case remanded to the District Court for further proceedings.
Affirmed and remanded.