Legal Opinion
Toy Ideas, Inc. v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided May 6, 1959No. Civ. No. 10428PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMSEN, Chief Judge.
This case involves the same patent which was held valid and infringed in Brock v. Brown, D.C.D.Md., 138 F.Supp. 628, affirmed Brown v. Brock, 4 Cir., 240 F.2d 723, namely, U. S. Patent No. 2,-675,644 for a “weeping doll”, issued April 20, 1954, to Senior et al. Those opinions contain a discussion of the prior art and of the method of operation of the Senior device, which need not be repeated here. Judge Sobeloff summarized the invention as follows:
“The successful Senior doll embodied, for the first time in a doll a liquid container that is rigid, that can be put anywhere…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Schriber-Schroth Co. v. Cleveland Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- United Carbon Co. v. Binney & Smith Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Exhibit Supply Co. v. Ace Patents Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Baker-Cammack Hosiery Mills, Inc. v. Davis Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1950
- Frick Co. v. LindsayCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1928
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Borg-Warner Corporation v. Paragon Gear Works, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1965
- United States Pipe & Foundry Co. v. James B. Clow & Sons, Inc.District Court, N.D. Alabama · 1962
- Engelhard Industries, Inc. v. Sel-Rex CorporationDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1966
- Plasser American Corp. v. Canron, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1980
- Blaw-Knox Co. v. Hartsville Oil MillDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1967
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.