Legal Opinion
Rees v. Lombard
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 1, 1927No. 5051PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DIETRICH, Circuit Judge.
The plaintiffs below (appellees here), as stockholders of the Progressive Evaporator Company, Inc., hereinafter called the Progressive Company, brought this suit in its behalf to enjoin the defendants, other than the Progressive Company, from infringing patent 1,413,135, covering a fruit-drying apparatus. Defendant Rees, the inventor, applied for the patent, but assigned the application to the Rees Blowpipe Manufacturing Company, a corporation substantially owned by him. Shortly after making this first application, he filed two others for improvements, which are still…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Littlefield v. PerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Excelsior Wooden Pipe Co. v. Pacific Bridge Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Lesser Cotton Co. v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Wade v. LawderSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Victor Talking Mach. Co. v. FairCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1903
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Saulsbury Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1944
- B. B. Chemical Co. v. Cataract Chemical Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1938
- Must v. WilkinsonDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1955