Legal Opinion

Trio Process Corp. v. L. Goldstein's Sons, Inc.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided January 20, 1966No. Civ. A. No. 38166PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LUONGO, District Judge.

Before me is defendant’s “Motion to Strike” the name of Franklin Smelting & Refining Co. (Franklin) as a party plaintiff to, and paragraph 8 of, the within complaint charging patent infringement and unfair competition in which jurisdiction is alleged to be founded upon 28 U.S.C.A. § 1338(a) and (b).1

*927From the allegations of the complaint it appears that Trio Process Corporation (Trio), one of the plaintiffs herein, is the owner, by assignment, of Patent No. 3,076,421 and that Franklin has acquired the right to practice that patent. It is alleged that defendant Goldstein…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hurn v. OurslerSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  2. Western Electric Co. v. Pacent Reproducer CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
  3. Geisert v. CorriveauDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1956
  4. McCormick v. LabelleDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1960
  5. Kurtzon v. Sterling Industries, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1964

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Curve Elementary School Parent & Teacher's Organization v. Lauderdale County School BoardCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1980
  2. Waterloov Gutter Protection System Co. v. Absolute Gutter Protection, L.L.C.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1999
  3. Schnabel v. BLDG. & CONST. TRADES COUNCIL OF PHILA.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. Truckee-Carson Irrigation District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1988
  5. Mitchell v. Penton/Industrial Publishing Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API