Poppenhusen v. New York Gutta Percha Comb Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
In equity. This was an application for a provisional injunction, to restrain the infringement of two letters patent, granted to L. Otto P. Meyer, one dated December 20th, 1833, [No. 330,] for an “improvement in processes for vulcanizing caoutcko-uc compounds,” and the other dated April 4th, 1854, [No. 10,741,] for an “improvement in treating caoutchouc and other vuleanizahle gums.”
Read the full summary
In equity. This was an application for a provisional injunction, to restrain the infringement of two letters patent, granted to L. Otto P. Meyer, one dated December 20th, 1833, [No. 330,] for an “improvement in processes for vulcanizing caoutcko-uc compounds,” and the other dated April 4th, 1854, [No. 10,741,] for an “improvement in treating caoutchouc and other vuleanizahle gums.” The bill averred, that the patents had been assigned to the plaintiff [Conrad Poppen-husen] by Meyer, on the 9th of September, 185G; that the plaintiff, on the 10th of December, 1857, brought an action at law…
1Opinion of the Court
INGERSOLL, District Judge.
The allegations of the hill, if true, entitle the plaintiff to relief by injunction, as prayed for. Most of the facts set forth in the bill have not been controverted. Indeed, most of them could not be controverted, for' they have been established by the verdict of a jury, upon an issue joined between the parties now before the court, which verdict was in accordance with the views entertained by the court 'upon the trial. The only allegation concerning the truth of which there is any serious denial by the defendants, in the affidavits which they have presented, is…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Lander v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1854
- Sherman v. NuttU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1888