Legal Opinion

American-Marietta Co. v. Krigsman

District Court, E.D. New York

Decided December 22, 1958No. Civ. A. No. 19150PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BYERS, Chief Judge.

This is a plaintiff’s motion for a temporary injunction in an unfair competition case. The device involved is a floor mop, the essential operating element of which is a synthetic sponge, made of a cellulose compound that resembles sponge rubber in appearance and function.

That element is squeezed dry of moisture content by the pressure of a back plate, manually applied to accomplish the desired result without contact between the hands of the user of the mop and the sponge itself.

The sponge is held in position by a metal base, into which a handle is inserted for ease in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Electric Auto-Lite Co. v. P. & D. MFG. CO.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
  2. Columbian Art Works, Inc. v. Defiance Slaes Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1930
  3. National Enameling & Stamping Co. v. WhiteDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1937

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Pezon Et Michel v. Ernest R. Hewin Associates, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1967
  2. American-Marietta Co. v. KrigsmanDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API