Legal Opinion

Lockwood v. Faber

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Decided February 5, 1886PublishedCited by 8 opinions

In Equity.

1Opinion of the CourtWallace, J.

The case, as it appears upon this motion, is not sufficiently clear for the complainant to entitle him to a preliminary injunction.

1. Doubts are suggested as to the validity of the patent upon a point which apparently was not considered in the ease of Lockwood v. Cutter Tower Co., 11 Fed. Rep. 724, at final hearing, or in the case of Lockwood v. Hooper, 25 Fed. Rep. 910, upon motion for an injunction. The patent is for a new article of manufacture, when produced by a specified process or method,—“a rubber eraser, having the soft finished erasivo surfaces produced by tumbling the erasers.” It…

2Cases cited1 opinion

Tyler v. BostonSupreme Court of the United States · 1869

3Cited by8 opinions

Stelos Co. v. Hosiery Motor-Mend CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1932
De Lamar v. De Lamar Min. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1902
Earl v. Southern Pac. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1896
Tannage Patent Co. v. ZahnU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1895
Gamewell Fire Alarm Telegraph Co. v. Hackensack Improvement CommissionDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1912

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.