Legal Opinion
Wagner v. Corn Products Refining Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided October 25, 1928PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RELLSTAB, District Judge.
This is an action at law to recover damages for an alleged infringement of a patent which expired before the suit was begun. The patent is for a “process of manufacturing anhydrous grape sugar from com and analogous farinaceous material.” The defendant moves to strike out the complaint, because it fails to allege that the defendant was notified of the infringement.
The plaintiff concedes that, if such notice is required in the case of a proeess patent, the present action will not lie, as no notice of that character was given. Ordinarily, a conscious infringer of a…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Railroad Companies v. SchutteSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Dunlap v. SchofieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Parker Rust Proof Co. v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1928
- Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Condit Electrical Mfg. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1908
- American Caramel Co. v. MillsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1907
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Warner v. Tennessee Products CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1932
- Hartford National Bank & Trust Co. v. E. F. Drew & Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1960
- American Ornamental Bottle Corp. v. Orange-Crush Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
- Enterprise Ry. Equipment Co. v. Wine Ry. Appliance Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1935
- (PS) Andrades v. City of Manteca Police Dept.District Court, E.D. California · 2024
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.