Legal Opinion
Claude Neon Lights, Inc. v. E. Machlett & Son
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided March 12, 1929No. 2465PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAMPBELL, District Judge.
This is a motion for a supplementary injunction, after decree on mandate, on a button-caesium electrode tube, made by Rainbow Light, Inc., one of the defendants in this suit.
Patent No. 1,125,476 was held valid and infringed, as to claim 1, by the Circuit Court *990of Appeals of this circuit in this action. 27 F.(2d) 702.
A careful consideration of the affidavits, arguments, and briefs submitted on this motion convinces me that it cannot be held that any and every combination that reduces depletion of neon gas by the spluttered film is an equivalent, but the Circuit Court…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hart Steel Co. v. Railroad Supply Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Claude Neon Lights, Inc. v. E. MacHlett & SonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
- Carson Inv. Co. v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1928
- Vapor Car Heating Co. v. Gold Car Heating & Lighting Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
3Cited by3 opinions
- Electrical Products Corp. v. Neale, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 1931
- Claude Neon Lights, Inc. v. E. Machlett & SonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Claude Neon Lights, Inc. v. E. Machlett & SonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1929