Legal Opinion

Zuckerman v. Pilot

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided July 23, 1940PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LEIBELL, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves, with supporting affidavits, for summary judgment under Rule 56(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. The amended complaint sets forth six alleged causes of action under 35 U.S.C.A. § 50 (third paragraph), which reads as follows:

“Who, in any manner, marks upon or affixes to any unpatented article the word ‘patent,’ or any word importing that the same is patented, for the purpose of deceiving the public, shall be liable, for every such offense, to a penalty of not less than $100, with costs; one-half of said penalty to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. London v. Everett H. Dunbar Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1910
  2. Taft v. Stephens Lith. & Eng. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1889
  3. A. B. Dick Co. v. FuerthU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1893
  4. Folberth Auto Specialty Co. v. Mayo-Skinner Mfg. Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1923
  5. Newgold v. American Electrical Novelty & Mfg. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1901

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Horace B. Brose v. Sears, Roebuck and CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
  2. Felt ex rel. United States v. Ronson Art Metal Works, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1952
  3. Calderwood v. MansfieldDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1947
  4. Julian B. Slevin Company v. Bartgis Brothers CompanyDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1956
  5. Lugash v. Santa Anita Manufacturing Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API