Legal Opinion

Smith-Corona Marchant, Inc. v. American Photocopy Equipment Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided March 14, 1963PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PALMIERI, District Judge.

The defendant moves for summary judgment dismissing Count II of the complaint in which it is charged with having violated Section 7 of the Clayton Act 1 through the acquisition of the assets of a patent holding company, including the “Eisbein” patent relating to photocopy machines using the method known as the diffusion-transfer-reversal process (diffusion process). The defendant’s acquisition followed a decision of the Seventh Circuit upholding the validity of the patent and its infringement by defendant. Copease Mfg. Co. v. American Photocopy Equip. Co., 298 F.2d…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Brown Shoe Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. United States v. Aluminum Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
  3. Julius Nagler v. Admiral CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
  4. Doehler Metal Furniture Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
  5. Copease Manufacturing Co. v. American Photocopy Equipment Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1961

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brick v. City of WichitaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1965
  2. Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. v. Graphic Controls Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1971
  3. Tabor v. LedererSupreme Court of Kansas · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API