Court Opinion

ID: 9447767
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 22:43:58.771178+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:31:11.167227
License: Public Domain

Petition for Rehearing
PER CURIAM.
The petition for a rehearing is denied. Our opinion referred to “reasonable means to distinguish the Schreiber & Goldberg machines and die assemblies from the Ameos.” We held that injunction of the use by Schreiber & Goldberg of the Y-Yoke, leaf-springs and auxiliary pressure arms involved no hardship because these features were not a part of *421the new type Schreiber & Goldberg machines. In our previous opinion we said “Moreover, as long as the source is properly identified, there is nothing wrong in defendants’ manufacture of parts interchangeable with plaintiff’s. [Citing cases.]” (269 F.2d 255, 274). This statement adequately covers the problem raised by the petition and should eliminate the possibility of vesting Amco with an exclusive monopoly in the interchangeable parts field.