Legal Opinion

Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Sangamo Electric Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

Decided March 25, 1904No. 47PublishedCited by 2 opinions

In Equity. Rule to show cause why the defendants should not be adjudged in contempt.

1Opinion of the Court

ARCHBALD, District Judge.*

This does not impress me as a case in which to declare a contempt. But a single sale by the respondents is shown since the injunction, and that oí a meter differing in form, if not in principle, from the one put in issue by the pleadings and proofs, and established by the decree as an infringement. There may be a suspicion of more from the enlargement of the ⅝ respondents’ works, which was made for the avowed purpose of manufacturing this class of meters. But whatever was done in that direction before the injunction, it is denied that there was anything after it,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Mutual Life Ins.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western New York · 1904
  2. Thomas v. Electric Porcelain Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1902

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Brown Bag-Filling Mach. Co. v. DrohenU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western New York · 1909
  2. Walker Patent Pivoted Bin Co. v. MillerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API