One-Piece Bifocal Lens Co. v. Bisight Co.
District Court, D. Maryland
In Equity. Suit by the One-Piece Bifocal Lens Company against the Bisight Company and Benjamin Mayer. Decree for complainant.
1Opinion of the Court
ROSE, District Judge.
Five patents are here in suit. Four of them belong to the plaintiff, which says the defendants infringe all of them. The individual defendant, Mayer, was the patentee of the fifth. It is now owned by the Bisight Company, his corporate codefendant. After it was issued, the Patent Office declared an interference between its single claim and the pending application, which ultimately resulted in one of the plaintiff’s patents now in suit. That interference was determined in favor of the plaintiff’s patentee. The plaintiff now asks that the finding then made may be carried to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Risdon Iron & Locomotive Works v. MedartSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Automatic Weighing Mach. Co. v. Pneumatic Scale Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1909
- Cohn v. United States Corset Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Stead Lens Co. v. Kryptok Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1914
- Kryptok Co. v. Stead Lens Co.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Application of Edward Burton LegriceCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
- Buono v. Yankee Maid Dress CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
- In Re Von BramerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1942
- Bisight Co. v. Onepiece Bifocal Lens Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1919
- General Electric Co. v. De Forest Radio Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1927
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.