Strobridge v. Lindsay
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania
In Equity. Sur rule for an attachment against defendants for contempt.
1Opinion of the Court
Achbson, D. J.
- In this case, the court, upon final hearing, held that the coffee-mill complained of, manufactured by Landers, Erary & Clark, and sold by the defendants, infringed the first claim of the plaintiff’s re-issued patent, viz.: “A coffee or similar mill, having a detachable hopper and grinding-shell formed in a single piece and suspended within the
*511box by -the upper part of the hopper, or a flange thereon, substantially as and for the purpose specified.”;* Accordingly, on May 31, 1880, a writ of injunction was issued against the defendants and duly served upon them. The case is now…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Radio Corporation of America v. AndreaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
- Westinghouse v. New York Air-Brake Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1893
- Risdon Iron & Locomotive Works v. TrentU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1899
- LAITRAM CORPORATION v. Deepsouth Packing Co.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1970
- Spirella Co. v. Nubone Corset Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania · 1910
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.