Legal Opinion

Sherman, Clay & Co. v. Searchlight Horn Co.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 9, 1915No. 2519PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Second Division of the Northern District of California; Wm. C. Van Fleet, Judge. Suit in equity by the Searchlight Horn Company against Sherman, Clay & Co. to enjoin infringement of letters patent, No. 771,441, for a horn for phonographs or similar machines granted to Peter C. Nielsen, October 4, 1904, with answer and petition by defendant to enjoin further prosecution of the suit, and for a stay.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Second Division of the Northern District of California; Wm. C. Van Fleet, Judge. Suit in equity by the Searchlight Horn Company against Sherman, Clay & Co. to enjoin infringement of letters patent, No. 771,441, for a horn for phonographs or similar machines granted to Peter C. Nielsen, October 4, 1904, with answer and petition by defendant to enjoin further prosecution of the suit, and for a stay. Petition denied, and stay refused, and defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the Court

WOLVERTON, District Judge.

This is a suit by appellee, the Searchlight Horn Company, against Sherman, Clay & Co., to enjoin the infringement of a patent, and for an accounting for profits realized and damages sustained by reason of the infringement. The complainant is the owner of the patent, and Sherman, Clay & Co. is a dealer in phonographic horns manufactured under the patent, and is selling them to retailers, who sell to users. Sherman, Clay & Co. purchases the horns from the Victor Talking Machine Company, of New Jersey. The Victor Company purchases from certain unknown manufacturers. The…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lovejoy v. MurraySupreme Court of the United States · 1866
  2. Birdsell v. ShaliolSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  3. Stebler v. Riverside Heights Orange Growers' Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1914

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Triangle Conduit & Cable Co. v. National Electric Products Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
  2. Shockley v. Arcan, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
  3. Triangle Conduit & Cable Co. v. National Electric Products Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1943
  4. Green v. Electric Vacuum Cleaner Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1942
  5. Dowagiac Mfg. Co. v. Deere & Webber Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1922

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API