Legal Opinion

Wireback v. Campbell

District Court, D. Maryland

Decided November 3, 1919Published

In Equity. Suits by Joseph F. Wireback and by said Wireback and others against Thomas D. Campbell and others, partners doing business as tlie Maryland Orthopedic Company.

1Opinion of the Court

ROSE, District Judge.

In the first of the above-entitled causes, the infringement of the first, second, and fourth claims of letters patent No. 736,186, for an extension shoe, issued to the plaintiff on the 11th of August, 1903, is charged. In the second it is alleged that two copyrighted trade catalogues of the plaintiffs have been infringed by the reproduction of certain original cuts contained in them. As much of the testimony is common to both cases, they wore by agreement tried together.

Patent Case.

[1J I see no reason to question the validity of any of the claims in suit. The defendants…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. L. A. Westermann Co. v. Dispatch Printing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
  2. Scribner v. Henry G. Allen Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1892
  3. J. L. Mott Iron Works vw. ClowU.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois · 1896
  4. Patterson v. J. S. Ogilvie Pub. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1902

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

Powered by the Exa API