H. Ward Leonard, Inc. v. Maxwell Motor Sales Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the CourtHough, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). It is a way of stating a part of the defense herein to say that plaintiff has put in evidence, as its commercial product, something which does not respond to the patents in suit, although purporting to be manufactured pursuant to the same. Therefore an endeavor will be made to give, in language as simple and untechnical as possible, what I conceive to be the scheme of operation of that product — in evidence as Plaintiff’s Exhibit M1. It is called an “automatic dynamo controller.” The dynamo to be controlled is in operation, or at least in revolution,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sundh Electric Co. v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1912
- Vacuum Engineering Co. v. DunnCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1913
3Cited by7 opinions
- Ziyad Abu Eain v. Peter Wilkes, United States Marshal for the Northern District of IllinoisCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
- Davis-Bournonville Co. v. Alexander Milburn Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
- Sindona v. GrantDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1978
- Tampax, Inc. v. Personal Products CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1941
- Danbury & Bethel Fur Co. v. American Hatters & Furriers Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.