Legal Opinion
MacClemmy v. Gilbert Corset Co.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided February 15, 1915No. 1378PublishedCited by 5 opinions
In Equity. Suit by Robert F. MacClemmy against the Gilbert Corset Company. On final hearing.
1Opinion of the Court
THOMAS, District Judge.
On February 1, 1910, the United States Patent Office issued to Robert F. MacClemmy two patents, numbered *74948,233 and 948,234, respecting improvements in body braces. The particular claims in controversy are 1, 2, and 5 of patent No. 948,233 and 4 and 7 of patent No. 948,234.
A stipulation filed at the trial admits that the plaintiff is the owner of said letters patent, that the Gilbert brace, concerning which the plaintiff makes complaint, was made by the defendant and sold by it from its factory in this district before the filing of the bill of complaint and subsequent to.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- David v. HarrisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1913
- Hale & Kilburn Mfg. Co. v. Oneonta, Cooperstown & Richfield Springs Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1904
- American Caramel Co. v. Glen Rock Stamping Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1912
- New Jersey Wire Cloth Co. v. Buffalo Expanded Metal Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western New York · 1904
- Good Form Mfg. Co. v. WhiteCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1908
3Cited by5 opinions
- J. A. Mohr & Son v. Alliance Securities Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1926
- Ensign Carburetor Co. v. Zenith-Detroit Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Smokador Mfg. Co. v. Tubular Products Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1928
- Dayton Rubber Mfg. Co. v. Dorman Automotive Parts Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1930
- Patent Tube Corp. v. Sun Tube Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1939