Young v. Lippman
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
[This was a bill in equity by Alexander K. Young against Philip Lippman and Clara Seligman. [Motion for provisional injunction.
Read the full summary
[This was a bill in equity by Alexander K. Young against Philip Lippman and Clara Seligman. [Motion for provisional injunction. Suit brought upon letters patent No. 74,672 for an “improvement in springs for hoop-skirts,” granted to Thomas B. De Forest and Thom-ns S. Gilbert, February 18, 1868, and assigned to complainant. [The nature of the invention is sufficiently stated in the opinion, and is further illustrated in the accompanying engraving, in which tlie black portions of the two side figures represent tne flat wire, and the shaded portions the folded fabric. These views are greatly…
1Opinion of the Court
BLATCHFORD, District Judge.
This is a motion for a provisional injunction, founded on letters patent granted February 18th, 186S, to Thomas B. De Forest and Thomas S. Gilbert, for an “improvement in springs for hoop-skirts,” and now owned by the plaintiff. The specification states that the inventors have invented “a new improvement in the manufacture of hoop-skirts.” There are three figures of drawings annexed to the specification. Figure 1 is a front view of one of the vertical tapes, with three springs attached. Figure 2 is a section of one of the springs, enlarged. Figure 3 is a like…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Consolidated Brake-Shoe Co. v. Detroit Steel & Spring Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1890