Diamond Match Co. v. Sun Match Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
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
- Miller v. Eagle Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Morley Sewing MacHine Co. v. LancasterSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Union Match Co. v. Diamond Match Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908
3Cited by5 opinions
- Clements Mfg. Co. v. Eureka Vacuum Cleaner Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1932
- General Register Corp. v. Lock-Stub Check Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1932
- General Register Corp. v. Lock-Stub Check Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- United States v. BarnettCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
- United States v. BarnettCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993