R. E. Dietz Co. v. C. T. Ham Manuf'g Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York
In Equity. Motion for preliminary injunction. Action bjr the R. E. Dietz Company and the Steam-Gauge & Lantern Company against the C. T. Ham Manufacturing Company, to restrain the infringement of two letters patent. Preliminary injunction denied. The complainants sue for infringement of two letters patent, No. 287,-932 and No. 450,444, granted to Charles J. Higgins and Lewis P. Letts, November 6, 1883, and April 14, 1891, respectively, for improvements in tubular lanterns.
Read the full summary
In Equity. Motion for preliminary injunction. Action bjr the R. E. Dietz Company and the Steam-Gauge & Lantern Company against the C. T. Ham Manufacturing Company, to restrain the infringement of two letters patent. Preliminary injunction denied. The complainants sue for infringement of two letters patent, No. 287,-932 and No. 450,444, granted to Charles J. Higgins and Lewis P. Letts, November 6, 1883, and April 14, 1891, respectively, for improvements in tubular lanterns. The distinguishing feature of the Higgins patent, No. 287,932, consists “in supporting the globe in a frame composed of a…
1Opinion of the CourtCoxe, J.
Enough of the prior art was disclosed upon the hearing of the motion to show that this industry is crowded to repletion. An immense number of patents for lanterns has been granted, many of them covering slight and, apparently, trivial changes in form and construction. The valuable feature of the Higgins lantern is that it permits the globe to to bo tilted laterally without disintegrating the tubular frame of the lantern; but the patent has never passed through the crucible of judicial investigation and it is possible that a trial may invalidate the patent or compel a narrow construction of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- American Nicholson Pavement Co. v. ElizabethUnited States Circuit Court · 1870
- Hammond v. HuntU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1879
- Brown v. HinkleyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1873
3Cited by2 opinions
- R. E. Dietz Co. v. Burr & Starkweather Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1917
- Holliday v. Long Manufacturing Co.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1955