Legal Opinion
Shikler v. Weinstein
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 14, 1952PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
IRVING R. KAUFMAN, District Judge.
The court has before it a motion to stay all proceedings herein until the final determination of a patent action presently pending in the District Court for the Eastern District of New York.. The patent in suit — Letters Patent No. 2,194,100 — is a “trouser waistband construction and method of fastening the same embodying a non-visible hook extending from a buttonhole positioned at the inside of the waistband portion of. the trouser.” Plaintiffs here, Frank Shikler and Walter Jacobs, own the’ patent which was originally granted to Shikler as the alleged…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kerotest Manufacturing Co. v. C-O-Two Fire Equipment Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Crosley Corporation v. Hazeltine CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
- Remington Products Corp. v. American Aerovap, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
- Hammett v. Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- Kerotest Mfg. Co. v. C-O-Two Fire Equipment Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1951
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Rosenfeld v. Schwitzer CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1966
- Delamere Company v. Taylor-Bell Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1961
- Parker-Hannifin Corp. v. Samuel Moore & Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1977
- Centronics Data Computer Corp. v. Merkle-Korff IndustriesDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1980
- Crawford v. Seaboard Coast Line RailroadDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · 1968