Legal Opinion
Schick Dry Shaver, Inc. v. R. H. Macy & Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 26, 1939PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GODDARD, District Judge.
One of these suits was brought by the plaintiffs against R. H. Macy & Co., Inc. the other against Sears, Roebuck & Company, both of which were selling dry shavers made by the Utility Instrument Company, which company has intervened in both cases with the consent of the plaintiffs. The suits are for infringement of patents for dry shavers. The same patents are alleged to be infringed in the two suits. Macy sells the device manufactured by the Utility Instrument Company under the name “Saybrooke Electric Razor”, and Sears, Roebuck & Company sells the same device under…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Smith v. SnowSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Minerals Separation, Ltd. v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- A. B. Dick Co. v. BarnettCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1923
- Schick Dry Shaver, Inc. v. Dictograph Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
- Motoshaver, Inc. v. Schick Dry Shaver, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Reeves Brothers, Inc. v. US Laminating Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1968
- Spee-Flo Manufacturing Corp. v. Gray Co.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1964