Schwartz v. Howard Hosiery Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.
In this suit for patent infringement the defendant has filed interrogatories under Rule 33, Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A. following section 723c. The plaintiff has answered four of them and objects to the others.
The patent is for a method of knitting, intended to produce stockings which will not develop runs. The fifth claim is for the fabric produced, but I am accepting the plaintiff’s view that it is not essentially different, so far as this question is concerned, from the others. The desired result depends entirely upon the manner in which the loops of…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Fleming v. BernardiDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1941
- Evans v. Local Union 2127, International Brotherhood of Electrical WorkersDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1969
- Gagen v. Northam Warren Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1953
- Bush v. SkidisDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1948
- Kendall v. United Air Lines, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1949
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.