Shimadzu v. Electric Storage Battery Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.
In this patent infringement suit plaintiff has moved for an inspection of the defendant’s processes, methods, and products and of its apparatus in actual operation.
Although infrequently exercised, there is very little doubt or difficulty about the power ■of a court of equity to order the disclosure by physical inspection of evidence in the defendant’s possession. The following well-settled principles govern:
First. The power exists, although the plaintiff has no absolute right to invoke it.
Second. It should not be exercised unless the plaintiff makes a showing that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Colgate v. Compagnie Francaise du Telegraphs de Paris a New YorkU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1885
- Rowell v. William Koehl Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1912
- Diamond Match Co. v. Oshkosh Match WorksU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin · 1894
3Cited by7 opinions
- Struthers Scientific & International Corp. v. General Foods Corp.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1968
- United States v. National Steel Corp.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1960
- Lever Bros. Co. v. Proctor & Gamble Mfg. Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1941
- Bleacher v. Bristol-Myers CompanySuperior Court of Delaware · 1960
- Niks v. Marinette Paper Co.District Court, N.D. New York · 1951
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.