Floridin Co. v. Attapulgus Clay Co.
District Court, D. Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
NIELDS, District Judge.
Motions by plaintiff for production of documents under rule 34, Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, and for an order compelling answers to certain questions under rule 37; and defendants’ motion to terminate or limit examination under rule 30.
This is a suit for infringement of Hartshorne patent No. 2,079,854, granted May 11, 1937, and assigned to plaintiff. The real defendant is Attapulgus Clay Company. Plaintiff mines and processes fuller’s earth in the Northern part of Florida. Defendant is engaged in the same business and its plant and mines…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Lever Bros. Co. v. Proctor & Gamble Mfg. Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1941
- Porter v. Montaldo'sDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1946
- Stark v. American Dredging Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1943
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Dictograph Products Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1947
- French v. Zalstem-ZalesskyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1940
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.