Max Daetwyler Corp. v. Input Graphics, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
LOUIS H. POLLAK, District Judge.
Plaintiffs have brought this action asserting two causes of action: count one of their amended complaint alleges that defendants are infringing plaintiffs’ patent for “doctor blades” — a blade-shaped device for wiping excess ink from the printing surface used in photogravure printing techniques — by manufacturing and selling a similar device; and count two asserts that the defendants falsely represented the characteristics of their doctor blade device in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham-Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). Defendants have now…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Trio Process Corporation, in No. 71-1295 v. L. Goldstein's Sons, Inc., in No. 71-1296Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
- Harold Friedman Inc. v. Thorofare Markets Inc. And Union Real Estate CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
- George Scharmer v. Carrollton Manufacturing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1975
- Hughes Tool Company v. Varel Manufacturing Company, Inc., Varel Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Hughes Tool CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1964
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- American Telephone And Telegraph Company v. Winback And Conserve Program, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- Johnson & Johnson-Merck Consumer Pharmaceuticals Company v. Rhone-Poulenc Rorer Pharmaceuticals, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- U.S. Healthcare, Inc. v. Blue Cross of Greater PhiladelphiaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Synygy, Inc. v. Scott-Levin, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1999
- Zerpol Corp. v. DMP Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.