Celluloid Manuf'g Co. v. Arlington Manuf'g Co.
United States Circuit Court
In Equity. Bill for infringement of letters patent No. 199,908, of February 5, 1878, to John W. Hyatt, assignor to the Celluloid Manufacturing Company, for the manufacture of celluloid and other plastic compositions. , On motion for preliminary injunction.
1Opinion of the CourtWales, J.
The patent has been held to be valid.1 The defendant admits, or at least does not deny, infringement, but claims that it had ceased to infringe before the bill was filed, and does not intend to renew *325the uso of the infringing machine. It still continues in possession of all tlio contrivances and appliances to enable it to violate the patent, but promises not to use them for that purpose. This is a naked and unsupported promise. The practice of the courts in such cases is well settled. In Woodworth v. Stone, 3 Story, 752, it was decided that “a bill for an injunction will lie, if the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rumford Chemical Works v. ViceU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York · 1877
3Cited by9 opinions
- General Electric Co. v. New England Electric Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1904
- Kennicott Water Softener Co. v. BainCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1911
- Matthews & Willard Manuf'g Co. v. National Brass & Iron WorksU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1895
- Deere & Webber Co. v. Dowagiac Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
- Brookfield v. Elmer GlassworksU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1904
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.