Legal Opinion

Mississippi Glass Co. v. Franzen

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided February 2, 1906No. 55PublishedCited by 22 opinions

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Pennsylvania.

1Opinion of the Court

ACHESON, Circuit Judge.

The Mississippi Glass Company (here the appellant) filed its bill in equity in the court below against Nicklas Franzen to compel the defendant to assign to the complainant letters patent of the United States, No. 741,125, dated October 13, 1903, granted to ,the defendant upon an application filed June 17, 1903, for a novel method of manufacturing that class of glass having wire imbedded therein, and commercially known as “wire glass”; also to assign to the complainant his application, serial No. 164,495, for a patent for the apparatus involved in said method. The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Dravo v. FabelSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  2. Grove v. HodgesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867
  3. Hulse v. Bonsack Mach. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1895
  4. Thibodeau v. HildrethCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1903

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Calkins v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
  2. Burke v. KennedySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  3. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1927
  4. Conway v. WhiteCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
  5. Guth v. Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1934

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

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

Powered by the Exa API