Legal Opinion
Innis, Speiden & Co. v. Food Machinery Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided March 11, 1942No. 1268PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BIGGS, Circuit Judge.
Innis, Speiden & Company acquired the entire right, title and interest in United States Patent No. 1,943,468 for certain improvements in “Wax Emulsion Coating, and Coating Process". By an agreement dated April 2, 1937 Innis, Speiden granted Franklin Research Company “an exclusive license” under the patent to manufacture wax emulsions and sell them at any place in the United States during the life of the contract. The agreement also provided specifically that Franklin Research could sub-license others to manufacture and sell the wax emulsions of the patent. On January 3,…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Waterman v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- United States v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Independent Wireless Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corp. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Mitchell v. HawleySupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Western Electric Co. v. Pacent Reproducer CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Diaz v. Southern Drilling Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- Smith Petroleum Service, Inc. v. Monsanto Chemical Company, Monsanto Chemical Company v. Smith Petroleum Service, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- Hartley Pen Co. v. Lindy Pen Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1954
- Antonio A. Diaz v. The Southern Drilling Corp., Also Known as South-Eastern Drilling Inc., Etal., and Trefina, A.G., Intervenor-Appellant. Great American Investment Company, Limited, Etc. v. W. P. Clements, Jr., and United States of America, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- Ilyin v. Avon Publications, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1956
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.