Legal Opinion

Pennsylvania Research Corp. v. Lescarboura Spawn Co.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided July 6, 1939No. 9909PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KALODNER, District Judge.

This is a patent infringement suit in equity. Both parties, after trial on the merits, have filed requests for findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Defendant, at the outset of the trial, moved to dismiss. Counsel for both sides agreed, however, that the motion might be affected by testimony to be adduced during the trial. Decision on the motion was reserved, but it will not be necessary to dispose of the motion separately. The decision on the merits will include the decision on the motion.

Suit was instituted by the filing of a bill of complaint. Defendant filed a…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. The Barbed Wire PatentSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Deering v. Winona Harvester WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  3. Altoona Publix Theatres, Inc. v. American Tri-Ergon Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
  4. Ensten v. Simon, Ascher & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
  5. Minerals Separation, Ltd. v. Butte & Superior Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Interdent Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1976
  2. Benz v. J. Laskin & Sons Corp.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1942
  3. Federal Telephone & Radio Corp. v. Associated Tel. & Tel. Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API