Legal Opinion
Paraffine Cos., Inc. v. Wieland
District Court, N.D. California
Decided February 28, 1927No. Nos. 1606, 1800PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KERRIGAN, District Judge.
The frequency with which certain questions as to bills of particulars and interrogatories in patent suits are presented to this court makes it desirable to formulate certain rules in order to settle the practice in these matters. The two cases discussed in this opinion have been selected because, between them, they raise practically all of the points most frequently presented to this court.
The general principles upon which bills of particulars and interrogatories will be allowed by this court have been adequately set forth by Judge Bledsoe, in Wilson v. Union Tool Co.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- A. B. Dick Co. v. Underwood Typewriter Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1916
- Luten v. CampDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1915
- Universal Oil Products Co. v. Skelly Oil Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1926
- Wilson v. Union Tool Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1921
- McLeod Tire Corp. v. B. F. Goodrich Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Boysell Co. v. Colonial Coverlet Co.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1939
- Boysell Co. v. HaleDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1939
- Looper v. Colonial Coverlet Co.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1939
- Prosperity Co. v. St. Joe Machines, Inc.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1942
- Martin v. Fairchild Aviation Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1938
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.