Legal Opinion

Valvona-Marchiony Co. v. Perella

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided March 12, 1913No. 114PublishedCited by 2 opinions

In Equity. Suit by the Valvona-Marchiony Company against Fred Perella and another. Bill dismissed.

1Opinion of the Court

ORR, District Judge.

This patent case comes before the court for final hearing upon bill, answer, replication, and proofs. The defense by the defendant Gambadella is that he is not a partner of the other defendant, but is merely an employe. No evidence was offered by the *378complainant in support of its averment that Gambadella was a partner, and therefore the bill should be dismissed as to him.

[1] The defenses set up by Perella are that the patent is invalid, and that, even if valid, his apparatus does not infringe complainant’s. That the patent is valid was held by Judge McPherson in the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Adams v. EdwardsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1848
  2. Valvona v. D'AdamoU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1905
  3. Valvona-Marchiony Co. v. Louisville Cone Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky · 1911
  4. Valvona-Marchiony Co. v. SilversteinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1910

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Valvona-Marchiony Co. v. MarchionyDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1913
  2. Valvona-Marchiony Co. v. PerellaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1914

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

Powered by the Exa API