Legal Opinion

Belknap v. Wallace Addressing Mach. Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided December 10, 1925PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WINSLOW, District Judge.

This is a suit brought by the plaintiff on a patent owned by him, No. 1,256,509. The patent covers a machine construction and a series of stencil cards co-operating with the other machine elements to stencil a series of names and addresses on envelopes or mailing wrappers. The stencil cards, which are claimed to be one of the elements of the operation, are made of rigid cardboard adapted to this particular machine, with a panel of paper in the center thereof pasted on the cardboard frame; “on the margin and baek of the margin, classification marks may be placed so as…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Expanded Metal Co. v. BradfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
  2. Leeds & Catlin Company v. Victor Talking Machine Company (No. 2)Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
  3. Heyer v. Duplicator Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
  4. Harvey Hubbell, Inc. v. General Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
  5. Individual Drinking Cup Co. v. ErrettDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1916

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Antonio Poipao and Linda Poipao v. County of El DoradoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
  2. Szymanski 222658 v. Centurion Health IncorporatedDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API