Legal Opinion

Hazeltine Corp. v. Atwater Kent Mfg. Co.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided July 26, 1929No. 3775PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DICKINSON, District Judge.

There . are few rights which are so far absolute as that they can be enforced to the limit without running into a wrong to some one else. This is the infringement of a patent suit. A patentee has the undoubted right granted by law to ask for an injunction and for damages against every maker, user, or seller of what has been patented. When, however, as here, the patented thing is made by a manufacturer who sells to jobbers, who in turn sell to dealers, who in their turn sell to users, and the patentee brings suit against every infringer, a very great inequity may be…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Union Tool Co. v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. Birdsell v. ShaliolSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  3. American School-Furniture Co. v. J. M. Sauder Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1901

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Saf-Gard Products, Inc. v. Service Parts, Inc.District Court, D. Arizona · 1980
  3. Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1965
  4. Conmar Products Corporation v. TibonyDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1945
  5. Utah Radio Products Co. v. BoudetteDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1934

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API