Legal Opinion

Motoshaver, Inc. v. Schick Dry Shaver, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 2, 1938No. 8808PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DENMAN, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from an order enjoining both appellants, pendente lite, from manufacturing, selling, advertising or offering for sale any shaving implement embodying the invention covered by patent No. 1,721,53o 1 and, particularly, the implements called Motoshaver and Dual-Head Motoshaver.

Appellant Dalmo Manufacturing Company, a California corporation, hereinafter called Dalmo, contends (1) that the Southern District of California is not the proper venue of the suit against it and the court, without Dalmo’s consent, cannot consider the charged infringement because it…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. Harkness v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  3. Toland v. SpragueSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
  4. Robertson v. Railroad Labor BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  5. General Electric Co. v. Marvel Rare Metals Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Stonite Products Co. v. Melvin Lloyd Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. Shapiro v. Bonanza Hotel Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1950
  3. Ruddies v. Auburn Spark Plug Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1966
  4. Arkay Infants Wear, Inc. v. Kline's, Inc.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1949
  5. Melvin Lloyd Co. v. Stonite Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941

9 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