Cary v. Lovell Manuf'g Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania
In Equity. Bill for infringement of patent, bee 31 Fed. Rep. 344. On exceptions to master’s report.
1Per curiam
The master, being of opinion that the license for the future use of the patented process at the rate of two cents per pound of springs, granted to R. H. Wolff & Co., Limited, on March 2, 1885, and the like license, at the same rate, granted to Gibson, Parish & Co., on November 14, 1885, were inadmissible as evidence, refused to hold the defendants liable for damages upon the basis of an established license fee. And as he has found that there is no satisfactory evidence disclosing what part, if any, of the defendants’ profits was due to the use of the patented process, or to show that the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Clark v. WoosterSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hunt Bros. Fruit-Packing Co. v. CassidayCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1894