Legal Opinion

Clairemont Sterilized Egg Co. v. Kasser Egg Process Co.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided April 21, 1926No. 1622PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KERRIGAN, District Judge.

These interrogatories raise questions as to which there has been an apparent diversity of ruling in this court, and the practice with regard to which should be made uniform. The objections to them fall within three groups, which will be considered separately.

Plaintiff objects to interrogatories 1 — 84, on the ground that they call for evidence as to the dates of invention or conception of its patents, and as to the dates of their re-, duction to practice. The argument is that to compel disclosure of such matters is to encourage the production of false evidence. In…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. A. B. Dick Co. v. Underwood Typewriter Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1916
  2. O-So-Ezy Mop Co. v. Channell Chemical Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1915
  3. Batdorf v. Sattley Coin Handling Mach. Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1916
  4. Marquette Mfg. Co. v. Oglesby Coal Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1918
  5. Miller & Pardee, Inc. v. Lawrence A. Sweet Mfg. Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1925

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Nakken Patents Corp. v. RabinowitzDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1940
  2. Chenault v. Nebraska Farm Products, Inc.District Court, D. Nebraska · 1949
  3. Paraffine Cos., Inc. v. WielandDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1927

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

Powered by the Exa API