Legal Opinion

Felt ex rel. United States v. Ronson Art Metal Works, Inc.

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided August 29, 1952No. Civ. No. 3971PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOYCE, District Judge.

Defendants, Ronson Art Metal Works (hereinafter referred to as RAMW) and Ronson Service of Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as RSM), move this court under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., for an order dismissing the above action on a number of grounds. Plaintiff brings this qui tarn action to recover a minimum penalty of $100 under the provisions of Section 4901 Revised Statutes, the pertinent portion of which provides that any person:

“ * * * Who, in any manner, marks upon or affixes to any unpatented ar- ■ tide the word 'patent/ or any…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. London v. Everett H. Dunbar Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1910
  2. Taft v. Stephens Lith. & Eng. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1889
  3. Hotchkiss v. Samuel Cupples Wooden-Ware Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1891
  4. Pentlarge v. KirbyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1884
  5. Zuckerman v. PilotDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1940

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Winkjer v. HerrNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Marion County Co-Op. Ass'n v. Carnation Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1953
  3. Ansul Company v. Uniroyal, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969
  4. Spears v. Canon De Carnue Land GrantNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Duhame v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1954

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API