Legal Opinion
Hildreth v. Bee Candy Mfg. Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Texas
Decided June 9, 1908No. 158Published
In Equity. On demurrer to bill for an injunction and account against the defendant for profits and damages as an infringer of patent No. 832,384, owned by the complainant, who claims to be the first inventor of certain new and useful improvements in candy pulling machines.
1Opinion of the Court
MAXEY, District Judge.
To the bill filed by the complainant the defendant has interposed several grounds of demurrer. The following was the only one insisted upon in the argument, and it alone will be considered:
“And for further ground of demurrer defendant says that plaintiff has not in said bill described the pretended patented design therein alleged to be infringed by defendant, and said bill gives defendant no notice of the charge he is required to meet”
*41After alleging that the complainant was the original inventor of “certain new and useful improvements in candy pulling machines,” and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Fowler v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1903
- American Bell Tel. Co. v. Southern Tel. Co.United States Circuit Court · 1888
- Germain v. WilgusCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1895
- Heaton Peninsular Button-Fastener Co. v. Schlocht-MeyerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern Ohio · 1895
- Chinnock v. Paterson, P. & S. Tel. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1901
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.