Legal Opinion

Standard Dental Mfg. Co. v. National Tooth Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

Decided June 27, 1899PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRAY, Circuit Judge.

This case came on to he heard upon the demurrer of the defendant to the hill of complaint. The hill of complaint states that both the complainant and the defendant are corporations chartered under the laws of Pennsylvania, and doing business in that state; that Alfred Page and Samuel S. Bloom, residents in Philadelphia, in said state, are the original joint and first inventors of a new and useful improvement in artificial teeth; that, being such original joint and first inventors, an application was made for letters patent, which were, in due course, granted to the said…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. James G. Wilson v. George A. Sanford and Robert G. MusgroveSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
  2. Hartell v. TilghmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  3. White v. LeeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1880
  4. Consolidated Middlings Purifier Co. v. WolfUnited States Circuit Court · 1886
  5. Adams v. MeyroseU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1881

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Luckett v. Delpark, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Ohio Citizens Trust Co. v. Air-Way Electric Appliance Corp.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1944
  3. Globe Steel Abrasive Co. v. National Metal Abrasive Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1939
  4. Comptograph Co. v. Burroughs Adding Mach. Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1910
  5. American Graphophone Co. v. Victor Talking Mach. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1911

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API