Legal Opinion

Steinfur Patents Corp. v. Philip Singer & Bro.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided August 21, 1930PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

WOOLSEY, District Judge.

This motion is denied.

The plaintiff’s counsel, however, may present to me for signature a calendar order putting this ease down for trial on the day calendar for the first day of the October, November, or December equity term, 1930, according to his choice.

I. This motion is made on two patents which have been sustained by Judge Campbell. Stein Fur Dyeing Co., Inc., v. Windsor Fur Dyeing Co., Inc. (D. C.) 3.1 F.(2d) 128.

For the purposes of this motion, therefore, the question of the validity of these patents was not under discussion. The sole question argued was the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Long Bell Lumber Co. v. First Nat. Bank of DrumrightCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1924
  2. Potter v. WhitneyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1866
  3. Elliott Addressing Mach. Co. v. Wallace Addressing Mach. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
  4. Elliott Addressing Mach. Co. v. Wallace Addressing Mach. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1930

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Penmac Corp. v. Falcon Pencil Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API