Heaton-Peninsular Button-Fastener Co. v. Eureka Specialty Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern Division of the Western District of Michigan. This is an appeal from the decree of the circuit court for the Western district of Michigan sustaining a demurrer filed by tbe defendants, and dismissing tbe bill of tbe complainant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern Division of the Western District of Michigan. This is an appeal from the decree of the circuit court for the Western district of Michigan sustaining a demurrer filed by tbe defendants, and dismissing tbe bill of tbe complainant. The averments of the bill are substantially these: The complainant, a corporation of the. state of Rhode Island, is, by assignment, tbe sole owner of several patents for inventions relating to the art of fastening buttons to shoes with metallic fasteners. The validity of these patents is not now…
1Opinion of the Court
LTTRTON, Circuit Judge.
After the foregoing statement, the opinion of the court was delivered by
Staples in size and form adapted to use in such machines are unpatented articles, and not even an element in a combination claim. They are therefore no more within the direct monopoly of the patents than are the buttons to be affixed by means of the staples, or the shoe to which both are to be attached. This conceded fact furnishes the foundation for the principal objection to the bill presented by the demurrer. It has been very earnestly and ably argued by counsel for appellees that the…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Gayler v. WilderSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Morgan Envelope Co. v. Albany Perforated Wrapping Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Patterson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Grant v. RaymondSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
- Bloomer v. McQuewanSupreme Court of the United States · 1853
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by106 opinions
- Crown Die & Tool Co. v. Nye Tool & MacHine WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Thomson-Houston Electric Co. v. Ohio Brass Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1897
- Western Electric Co. v. Pacent Reproducer CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
- Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. McConnellU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Middle Tennessee · 1897
101 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.