Legal Opinion
Surgitube Products Corp. v. Scholl Manufacturing Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided January 24, 1958PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
DAWSON, District Judge.
This action tried by the Court without a jury is one for alleged patent infringement. Plaintiff is the assignee of a bandage patent and claims that defendant is ■ liable to it under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) and (c) as a contributory infringer of its patent and as having actively induced the ' infringement of its patent. Defendant has raised four defenses, (1) invalidity of the patent, (2) non-infringement, (3) patent misuse, and (4) laches. The patent involved is Patent No. 2,326,997 for a “bandage.”
The Court finds the following facts:
1. Plaintiff Surgitube Products…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Morton Salt Co. v. G. S. Suppiger Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Hotchkiss v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Carbice Corp. of America v. American Patents Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Leitch Manufacturing Co. v. Barber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Dean A. Lyon v. Bausch & Lomb Optical Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Surgitube Products Corp. And Louis Hochman v. Scholl Mfg. Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959