Legal Opinion

H. Tibbe & Son Manuf'g Co. v. Heineken

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Decided February 18, 1889PublishedCited by 5 opinions

In Equity. On motion for preliminary injunction. Bill by H. Tibbe & Son Manufacturing Company against William L. Heineken for the infringement of a patent.

1Opinion of the CourtLacombe, J.

This is an application for a preliminary injunction to restrain infringement of letters patent No. 205,816, of July 9, 1878, granted to Henry and Anton Tibbe for “improvement in pipes.” There has been no adjudication in support of the patent, except a decree which, being on consent, need not be regarded. Complainant insists that the validity of the patent has been suitably acquiesced in by the public, showing that its sales of articles covered thereby have run up into tbe millions. The weight of this argument is greatly weakened by the facts shown in defense, viz.: That the defendant has been…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Eno v. Prime Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  2. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co. v. Finley Rubber Tire Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Georgia · 1902
  3. International Burr Corporation v. Wood Grinding ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
  4. Auto Spring Repairer Co. v. GrinbergU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1912
  5. Federal Electric Co. v. Flexlume Corp.District Court, W.D. New York · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API