Bowers v. Pacific Coast Dredging & Reclamation Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California
On order to show cause why respondents should not be punished for contempt in violating a writ of perpetual injunction issued under interlocutory decree.
1Opinion of the Court
MORROW, Circuit Judge.
This is a proceeding against the respondents for violating a perpetual injunction issued upon an interlocutory decree entered in this case December 12, 1898. It was there adjudged and decreed that the letters patent of the United States, jSTo. 318,859, bearing date May 26, 1885, for a “dredging machine,” granted by the government, of the United States to Alphonzo B. Bowers, the complainant, were good and valid in law as to claims 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 22, 25, 53, 54, 59, and 87, and that the said Alphonzo B. Bowers was the original and first inventor of the invention…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Railway Co. v. SaylesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Cantrell v. WallickSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Keystone Bridge Co. v. Phoenix Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1877
- McCormick v. TalcottSupreme Court of the United States · 1858
- Consolidated Safety-Valve Co. v. Crosby Steam Gauge & Valve Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1885
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bankers' Utilities Co. v. Pacific Nat. BankCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
- Kalamazoo Loose-Leaf Binder Co. v. Proudfit Loose-Leaf Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1917
- Metallizing Engineering Co. v. B. Simon, Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 1945
- Thomas v. Electric Porcelain Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1902
- Pacific Coast Dredging & Reclamation Co. v. BowersCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1901