Pearce v. Mulford
Supreme Court of the United States
This is a suit by. Lewis J. Mulford, Seth. W. Hale, Shubael C.ottle,.and Samuel P. Baker, doing business under the firm name of Mulford, Hale, & Cottle, against Thomas D. Pearce.
Read the full summary
This is a suit by. Lewis J. Mulford, Seth. W. Hale, Shubael C.ottle,.and Samuel P. Baker, doing business under the firm name of Mulford, Hale, & Cottle, against Thomas D. Pearce. The.complainants’ bill prays for an injunction tó restrain his infringement of reissued letters-pafent No. 5774', granted to the complainants as assignees of Shubael Cottle, Feb. 24, 1874, for an alleged new and useful improvement in chains and chain links for necklaces, &c., upon the surrender of original letters No. 147,045, granted BYb.. 3,1874. The bill siso prays for an account of profits and 'damages. The…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Strong
In view of the evidence found in the record, it cannot be.questioned that ornamental chains composed of alternate closed links and spiral links, or formed by spiral links alone, had bee7,.-known and in use long before Cottle made his alleged invention. As was said by the circuit judge, “ Chains' formed by split rings which are sprung Into each other, or into a solid link, are familiar articles, and there can be no novelty in the mere shape or- form of the chain, or of the link which is shown in the drawings of the patent.” There is abundant evidence, not only that split rings had been long…
2Cited by62 opinions
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. Locomotive Engine Safety Truck Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Burt v. EvorySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Radtke Patents Corporation v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
- Tropic-Aire, Inc. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1930
- Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.