Legal Opinion

Papercraft Corp. v. Procter & Gamble Co.

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 27, 1977No. Civ. A. 77-45PublishedCited by 4 opinions

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

  1. Goldlawr, Inc. v. HeimanSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Cannon Manufacturing Co. v. Cudahy Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
  3. Remington Rand, Inc. v. Knapp-Monarch CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1956
  4. Frito-Lay, Inc. v. Procter & Gamble CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1973
  5. 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

  1. Finance Co. of America v. BankAmerica Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1980
  2. Budd Co. v. United States Department of TransportationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Scott Paper Co. v. Nice-Pak Products, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1988
  4. Conaway Enterprises, Inc. v. Dyna Industries, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API