Doig v. Morgan Mach. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of New York. This cause comes here upon appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court, "Western District of New York, dismissing the bill. The suit was upon United States patent No. 342,268, May 18, 1886, to Wm. S. Doig, assignee ■of Smith & Doig, for improvements in box-nailing machines.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of New York. This cause comes here upon appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court, "Western District of New York, dismissing the bill. The suit was upon United States patent No. 342,268, May 18, 1886, to Wm. S. Doig, assignee ■of Smith & Doig, for improvements in box-nailing machines. This patent and another were declared upon in the action of Doig v. Sutherland (C. C.) 87 Fed. 991, and claims 1, 3, 5, and 6 were held valid and infringed. Upon the strength of the decision in the Sutherland Case, a preliminary…
1Opinion of the CourtEacombe, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts). The invention relates to improvements in box-nailing machines, and has reference, as the specification states, “to the nail receiving and distributing device, and to the nail conducting and driving mechanism.” Box-nailing machines are complicated structures, with many parts, performing many different functions, as may well be supposed when it is understood that, at one end of the machine, nails are loosely thrown into a hopper or nail-supply pan, and from another end boxes are removed, into which the nails have been properly driven at regular spaces. The machine…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Aron v. Manhattan Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Underwood v. GerberSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. v. ThumCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1901
- Schenck v. Singer Manuf'g Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1897
- Mayor of New York v. American Cable Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1895
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Hazeltine Corporation v. Radio Corporation of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1931
- Stead Lens Co. v. Kryptok Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1914
- Sandy MacGregor Co. v. Vaco Grip Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1924
- Kryptok Co. v. Stead Lens Co.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1913
- Schreyer v. Casco Products Corp.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1951
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.