Legal Opinion
Sperry Rand Corp. v. Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 19, 1959PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DAWSON, District Judge.
This is a motion by plaintiffs for leave to amend their complaint.
The action has been brought pursuant to the provisions of 35 U.S.C.A. § 146, by a party dissatisfied with the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences “on the question of priority.”*
The papers show that this lawsuit involves the patentability of certain alleged inventions relating to an electronic numerical integrator and computer, known as ENIAC.
As appears from the complaint, plaintiff contends that its assignors, John P. Eckert, Jr., and John W. Mauchly, were the inventors of useful improvements in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sanford v. KepnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Frederick F. Glass v. William C. De RooCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956
- Shell Development Co. v. Pure Oil Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1953
- Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Corp. v. JaninCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
- Prahl v. RedmanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1941
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Radio Corporation of America v. Philco CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
- Sperry Rand Corp. v. Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1962
- General Motors Corporation v. R. E. Dietz CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1969
- Potter Instrument Co. v. Mohawk Data Sciences Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969
- E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Celanese Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1968
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.