Legal Opinion
Jackson v. Dunham-Bush, Inc.
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided July 17, 1963No. Civ. No. 10867PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WINTER, District Judge.
Plaintiff has sued for infringement of his Patent No. 2,755,371, issued July 17, 1956, for a defroster for freezing coils. Joined as defendants are the manufacturer of the alleged infringing device, Dunham-Bush, Inc. (hereafter called “Dunham-Bush”), an assignee, through a subsidiary, of Patent No. 2,611,587, issued to Cecil Boling on September 23,. 1952, the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea. Co., a user of the alleged infringing device, and Roche and Hull, Inc., a distributor of the alleged infringing device. Dunham-Bush assumed the defense for all defendants, and has…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Carnegie Steel Co. v. Cambria Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- James C. Hobbs v. Wisconsin Power & Light Company and William Powell CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1957
- Entron on Maryland, Inc. v. Jerrold Electronics CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1961
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ritter v. Rohm & Haas CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1967
- Cleeton v. Hewlett-Packard CompanyDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1972
- Earl R. Jackson v. Dunham-Bush, Inc., Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., and Roche and Hull, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1964