8 IN 1 PET PRODUCTS, INC. v. Swift & Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
McLEAN, District Judge.
This is an action for trade mark infringement and unfair competition. Plaintiff has moved under Rule 34 to require defendant to produce documents described in fifteen separate items. As to nine of those items plaintiff is satisfied with defendant’s compliance. As to Items 1, 2, 11 and 12, plaintiff claims that the documents produced are not responsive. Defendant claims that it has no documents other than those produced. As to Items 4 and 13, defendant claims that the documents are privileged and that no good cause has been shown for their production. The two documents…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. United Shoe MacHinery CorporationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1950
- City of Philadelphia v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1962
- Georgia-Pacific Plywood Co. v. United States Plywood Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1956
- American Cyanamid Company v. Hercules Powder CompanyDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1962
- Radiant Burners, Inc. v. American Gas AssociationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1962
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Mead Data Central, Inc. v. United States Department of the Air ForceCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
- Hearn v. RhayDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · 1975
- Garner v. WolfinbargerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- In Re Sealed CaseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1984
- William M. Brinton v. Department of StateCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.