Legal Opinion
Shaffer Tool Works v. Joy Manufacturing Co.
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided December 23, 1974No. Civ. A. No. 71-H-1278PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
SEALS, District Judge.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER:
The Court, having considered the motions pending in this cause of action, hereby orders:
Motion Under Rule 16 by Defendant Joy Manufacturing Company is granted in part and denied in part.
Joy’s motion consists of four requests for orders to aid in framing and limiting the issues in this litigation. While Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not appear to be the proper means, the end sought is a worthy one and merits consideration by the Court.
The first part of the motion seeks to have Plaintiffs barred from introducing evidence of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Permutit Co. v. Graver Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- California Research Corporation v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1966
- Xerox Corporation v. Dennison Manufacturing CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1971
- Alexander P. Deseversky v. Edward J. Brenner, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1970
- Montecatini Edison, S.P.A. (A Corporation of Italy) v. Karl Ziegler, and E. I. Dupont De Nemours and Company (A Corporation of Delaware)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Shaffer Tool Works v. Joy Manufacturing Co.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1976