McMillin v. St. Louis & Miss. Valley Transp. Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri
In Equity. Demurrer to the bill. The bill prays for damages and an injunction. The-dife of the patent sued on has not expired. The remaining facts sufficiently appear from the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtTbeat, J.
There is a demurrer in this and several other cases, all pertaining to the same question. The contention as to the first point is that the decision of the United States supreme court (Root v. Ry. Co. 105 U. S. 180) establishes the doctrine that whore a, patentee seeks for the use of his patent merely a stipulated royalty or license, he cannot proceed in equity for an infringement. That ease was where damages wore sought to be recovered for an infringement made against an expired patent before the expiration thereof. It does not, nor docs any other case known to the court, oust equity of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Manufacturing Co. v. BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1882
3Cited by5 opinions
- Universal Oil Products Co. v. Skelly Oil Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1926
- Bonney Supply Co. v. HeltzelDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1917
- Victor Talking Mach. Co. v. American Graphophone Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1905
- Lettelier v. MannU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1897
- Luten v. SharpDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1912