Legal Opinion

Chas. H. Lilly Co. v. I. F. Laucks, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 21, 1933No. 7084PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SAWTELLE, Circuit Judge.

This ease is similar to and was consolidated for trial with the ease of Lilly Co. et al. v. Laucks, Inc. (C. C. A.) 68 F.(2d) 175, No. 7083, opinion filed herewith. Case No. 7083 will loe referred to hereinafter as the Johnson Patent Case. Both suits are between the same parties.

In this suit, as in the Johnson Patent Case, the bill of complaint named Kaseno Products Company and George F. Linquist as direct infringers of plaintiff-appellee’s patents, by reason of having manufactured and sold an adhesive embodying the products of appel-lee’s inventions, and alleged that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Chas. H. Lilly Co. v. I. F. Laucks, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
  2. I. F. Laucks, Inc. v. Kaseno Products Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 1932

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. The UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS FOUND. v. Block Drug Co.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 1955
  2. Chas. H. Lilly Co. v. I. F. Laucks, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API