Legal Opinion

Diamond Match Co. v. Sun Match Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided December 6, 1926No. 80PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHough, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). It may be, and we think is, admitted that in its entirety the combination of parts producing a mechanism capable of doing what this machine does is an invention of importance, and both by its commercial success and the surmounted difficulties .of co-ordinate operation, deserving of that sympathetic consideration, usually expressed by granting a wide rangfe of equivalents.

This doctrine needs no citation for its support, but neither do other and important considerations, viz. that the patent is not on a new product or composition of matter, for match books…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Miller v. Eagle Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Morley Sewing MacHine Co. v. LancasterSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  3. Union Match Co. v. Diamond Match Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Clements Mfg. Co. v. Eureka Vacuum Cleaner Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1932
  2. General Register Corp. v. Lock-Stub Check Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1932
  3. General Register Corp. v. Lock-Stub Check Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
  4. United States v. BarnettCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
  5. United States v. BarnettCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API