Papercraft Corp. v. Procter & Gamble Co.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MARSH, District Judge.
Plaintiffs brought this action seeking a declaratory judgment that certain patents held by the defendant are invalid or are not infringed by the manufacture, sale or use of plaintiffs’ fabric conditioner product. Defendant has filed a motion under Rule 12(b), Fed.R.Civ.P., seeking to have the action dismissed or transferred and alleging, inter alia, that venue in this dis trict is improper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c). 1 The motion to transfer will be granted.
The general venue statute provides that a corporation may be sued in any judicial district in which it is (1)…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Goldlawr, Inc. v. HeimanSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Cannon Manufacturing Co. v. Cudahy Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Remington Rand, Inc. v. Knapp-Monarch CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1956
- Frito-Lay, Inc. v. Procter & Gamble CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1973
- Trinity Metals v. Andy International, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1977
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Finance Co. of America v. BankAmerica Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1980
- Budd Co. v. United States Department of TransportationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
- Scott Paper Co. v. Nice-Pak Products, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1988
- Conaway Enterprises, Inc. v. Dyna Industries, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1982