Legal Opinion

Buxton, Inc. v. Gardner

District Court, E.D. Missouri

Decided March 24, 1942No. 622PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MOORE, District Judge.

This is an action for patent infringement and the issue presented arises from a motion by defendant for a more definite statement or bill of particulars under Rule 12(e) of Federal Rules of Civil Pro*352cedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. Defendant has asked for five particulars, three of which have been answered voluntarily by plaintiff. Numbers 4 and 5, however, are objected to by the plaintiff. They are:

4. Define precisely what plaintiff asserts or claims is new and patentable in each of the claims of the patents in suit charged to be infringed.

5. Designate…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. ByrnesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939
  2. Wilson v. Union Tool Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1921
  3. Jessup & Moore Paper Co. v. West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1938
  4. Midwest Mfg. Co. v. Filter Corp.District Court, W.D. New York · 1935
  5. Dill Mfg. Co. v. Acme Air Appliance Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1941

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Bowles v. KarpDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API