Read Holliday & Sons, Ltd. v. Schulze-Berge
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
This was a suit in equity by Bead Holliday & Bons, Limited, against Paul Schulze-Herge, Victor Kocchl, and August Movius, for alleged infringement of a patent
1Opinion of the Court
TOWNSEND, District Judge.
The patent in suit, No. 250,247, as to which infringement is alleged, was granted November 29, 1881, to John Holliday, and duly assigned to complainant. The claim in controversy is the first, which is as follows: “The sulpho-conjugated compound of rosaniline, possessing the properties specified, as a new article of manufacture.” The patent was considered by Judge Blatehford, on motion for a preliminary injunction, in Holliday v. Pickhardt, 12 Fed. 147, and on final hearing by Judge *494Wallace, who sustained the validity of the patent after protracted litigation and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gill v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- The Incandescent Lamp PatentSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Pickhardt v. PackardU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1884
- Holliday v. PickhardtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1887
- Edison Electric Light Co. v. Boston Incandescent Lamp Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1894
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Donner v. Sheer Pharmacal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933
- Kalo Inoculant Co. v. Funk Bros. Seed Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1947
- In Re AyresCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
- In re PruttonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
- Ufer v. WilliamsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1935
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.