Bolte & Weyer Co. v. Knight Light Co.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States 'for. the Northern District'of Illinois. Suit in equity by the Bolte & Weyer Company against the Knight Bight Company. Decree for defendant, and complainant appeals. The appeal is from a decree dismissing the bill for want of equity. The bill was to restrain infringement of letters patent. No. 38,638, issued June 25, 1907, to Joseph J: Weyer, for design for lamps.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States 'for. the Northern District'of Illinois. Suit in equity by the Bolte & Weyer Company against the Knight Bight Company. Decree for defendant, and complainant appeals. The appeal is from a decree dismissing the bill for want of equity. The bill was to restrain infringement of letters patent. No. 38,638, issued June 25, 1907, to Joseph J: Weyer, for design for lamps. The design is as follows: The alleged infringing design is as folien
1Opinion of the CourtGrosscup, Circuit Judge
Counsel for appellant lay down the rule of infringement as follows: “Would an ordinary purchaser, familiar with the design of the patent, be deceived into purchasing the defendant’s device, believing it was the device of the patent?” and in support of this test cite the cases of Smith v. Whitman Saddle Co., 148 U. S. 680, 13 Sup. Ct. 768, 37 L. Ed. 606, and Jennings v. Kibbe (C. C.) 10 Fed. 669. We do not think that these cases support this test. The rule laid down in Jennings v. Kibbe (quoted in Smith v. Whitman Saddle Co.) is as follows: ....
“The true test of identity of design is sameness…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Gorham Co. v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Smith v. Whitman Saddle Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Dobson v. DornanSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Britton v. White Manuf'g Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1894
- Jennings v. KibbeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1882
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Battery Patents Corp. v. Chicago Cycle Supply Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1940
- Amerock Corporation v. Aubrey Hardware Manufacturing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1960
- Majestic Electric Development Co. v. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1921
- Try-Me Beverage & Compound Co. v. MetropoleDistrict Court, E.D. South Carolina · 1928
- In re SmithCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1935