Legal Opinion
Gibbs v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided May 26, 1927No. 1006PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SOPER, District Judge.
The complainant in this ease is the patentee of a number of letters patent relating to animal traps, and is engaged in the manufacture of traps under his patents, including the patent in suit. The defendant is the well-known Chicago mail order house, and has an established place of business id Baltimore. It sells infringing traps manufactured by the Triumph Trap Company of Oneida, N. Y., and the defense of the suit *614is being conducted by that corporation. For convenience, tbe Triumph Trap Company ■will be called the defendant in this opinion. The patent in suit is No.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- The Barbed Wire PatentSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Ohio Brass Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1897
- Century Electric Co. v. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1911
- Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Elmira & H. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1896
- Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Black River Traction Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1905
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Carl Otto v. Koppers Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and Wheeling Steel Corporation, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1957
- Diamond International Corporation v. WalterhoeferDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1968
- Tidewater Patent Development Company, Incorporated v. K. M. Kitchen and Virginia M. Kitchen, Partners Trading as K. M. Kitchenbeauty Supply CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1967
- United States Pipe & Foundry Co. v. James B. Clow & Sons, Inc.District Court, N.D. Alabama · 1962
- Glatt v. G. C. Murphy Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1958
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.