Legal Opinion
I. T. S. Rubber Co. v. Essex Rubber Co.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided November 27, 1920No. 1008PublishedCited by 10 opinions
In Equity. Suit the I. T. S. Rubber Company against the Essex Rubber Company. On defendant’s motion to dismiss.
1Opinion of the Court
ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.
The defendant moves to dismiss for want of jurisdiction this patent infringement suit, brought by an Ohio *596corporation against a New Jersey corporation for alleged infringement of the Tuiford patent on resilient heels, No. 14,049, reissued January 11, 1916.
[1] The jurisdiction in this district, if any, is grounded on section 48 of the Judicial Code, the relevant parts of which are as follows:
“In suits brought for the infringement of letters patent the District Courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction, in law or in equity, in the district of which the…
2Cases cited55 opinions
- Seymour v. OsborneSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- McClain v. OrtmayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Mast, Foos & Co. v. Stover Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Brown v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Winans v. DenmeadSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- I. T. S. Rubber Co. v. Essex Rubber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- International Bldg. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1952
- Fairhope Fabrics, Inc. v. Mohawk Carpet Mills, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1956
- Warford Corporation v. Bryan Screw MacH. Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
- Hall v. MainDistrict Court, E.D. Illinois · 1929
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.