Legal Opinion
United States v. Hartford-Empire Co.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided October 9, 1947No. Civ. A. 554PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEAHY, District Judge.
The United States sues to cancel expired patent No. 1,655,391 and three subsisting patents Nos. 2,073,571, 2,073,572 and 2,073,573, on the ground of fraud in their procurement. The matter is here on defendant’s two motions for summary judgment — one, that as to ’391 the case is moot; and, two, that as to ’571-3 defendant’s right to hold and own such patents is beyond dispute because of res judicata and other defenses. For purposes of determining the motions, the allegations of fact in the complaint must be considered as true. Hence, at this point there are presented only…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Simon v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Marshall v. HolmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- United States v. American Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Arrowsmith v. GleasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Zenith Laboratories, Inc., on Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Carter-Wallace, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Lanova Corp. v. Atlas Imperial Diesel Engine Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1949
- Harris v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949
- United States v. Marifarms, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1972
- Hadden v. Rumsey Products, Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 1951
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.