Legal Opinion
Carter Products, Inc. v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided May 9, 1957No. Civ. No. 6924PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMSEN, Chief Judge.
Defendant Colgate has moved to “clarify arid amplify” the decree entered herein by Judge Coleman and affirmed by the Court of Appeals, 4 Cir., 230 F.2d 855, by changing the accounting period for damages and profits which was specified in paragraph 14 of the decree and in the opinion and mandate of the Court of Appeals. For Judge Coleman’s opinion see D. C., 130 F.Supp. 557.
The complaint charged patent infringement and appropriation of trade secrets relating to a pressurized shaving cream. After a long trial, Judge Coleman held the patent valid, enjoined infringement…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- L. P. Larson, Jr., Co. v. Wm. Wrigley, Jr., Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Colgate-Palmolive Co. v. Carter Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1956
- Clarke v. Hot Springs Electric Light & Power Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1935
- LP Larson, Jr., Co. v. William Wrigley, Jr., Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1927
- Loew's Drive-In Theatres, Inc. v. Park-In Theatres, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1949
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Carter Products, Inc. v. Colgate-Palmolive CompanyDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1963
- Carter Products, Inc. v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1958