Legal Opinion

Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Calehuff Supply Co.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided June 13, 1918No. 2360PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; Oliver B. Dickinson, Judge. Suit in equity for infringement by the Motion Picture Patents Company against the Calehuff Supply Company, Incorporated. From a decree (248 Fed. 724) dismissing the hill on final hearing, plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the Court

WOOLLEY, Circuit Judge.

In this action the defendant is charged with infringement of plaintiff’s patent No. 707,934, granted to Wood-ville Latham, August 26, 1902, for a Projecting Kinetoscope. The court found claim 7 of the patent — -which was the only one in issue —invalid, and dismissed the bill. 248 Fed. 724. The plaintiff ap - pealed.

The defences at the trial were: (1) Invalidity of the patent by reason of prior patents and prior inventions, (2) estoppel by virtue of certain Patent Office proceedings, and (3) non-infringement. Infringement was later admitted. As the issue of estoppel is…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Calehuff Supply Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1918

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Cold Metal Process Co. v. American Sheet & Tin Plate Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1938
  2. Radio Corporation v. Dubilier Condenser CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1932
  3. Globe Oil & Refining Co. v. Sinclair Refining Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
  4. Berghane v. Radio Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1953
  5. Gotz v. Universal Products Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1938

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API