Welling v. Rubber-Coated Harness Trimming Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey
In equity. [This was a motion for an attachment for an alleged violation of an injunction restraining the defendants from making, using, or vending any harness or carriage trimmings containing the invention of the plaintiff [William M. Welling], to wit. “a ring, manufactured as set forth substantially,” with “a metal ring enveloped in composition, as and for the puiposes specified.”
Read the full summary
In equity. [This was a motion for an attachment for an alleged violation of an injunction restraining the defendants from making, using, or vending any harness or carriage trimmings containing the invention of the plaintiff [William M. Welling], to wit. “a ring, manufactured as set forth substantially,” with “a metal ring enveloped in composition, as and for the puiposes specified.” The injunction had been obtained upoD proof that the defendants ■had made rings for harness by coating metal with hard rubber by the use of dies. It was now charged, upon the motion for an attachment, that the…
1Opinion of the Court
NIXON, District Judge.
This is an application for an attachment against the defendants for violating an injunction issued by this court, June 12, 187-1, restraining them from making, using, or vending to others to be used. any harness or carriage trimmings containing the invention of the plaintiff, and secured to him by letters patent, to wit: “a ring manufactured as set forth substantially,” with a metal ring enveloped in composition, as and for the purposes specified. This injunction followed the decree of the court, sustaining the validity of the complainant’s patent, No. 37,941 (March 17,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rubber-Coated Harness-Trimming Co. v. WellingSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
3Cited by1 opinion
- Smith v. HalkyardU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1884