UNITED STATES v. KRYPTOK CO.


11 F.2d 874 (1925)

UNITED STATES v. KRYPTOK CO. et al.

District Court, S. D. New York.

July 22, 1925.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Emory R. Buckner, U. S. Atty., of New York City (David A. L'Esperance, Jr., and Rush Williamson, Sp. Asst. Attys. Gen., and Ryland W. Joyce, Sp. Asst. U. S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), for the United States.

Stockbridge & Borst, of New York City (Edward F. McClennen, of Boston, Mass., and William M. Stockbridge, of New York City, of counsel), for defendant Kryptok Co.

Choate, Hall & Stewart, of Boston, Mass. (Charles F. Choate, Jr., of Boston, Mass., of counsel), for defendants Bausch & Lomb Optical Co. and American Optical Co.

Niles & Johnson, of New York City (Henry B. Johnson, of New York City, of counsel), for defendant General Optical Co.


MACK, Circuit Judge.

In January, 1923, after investigating the matter over a period of some 11 years, the United States filed its bill in equity to enjoin an alleged combination and conspiracy by the defendants in the manufacture and sale of fused bifocal lenses and blanks.

Defendant Kryptok Company does nothing but grant licenses under basic patents, covering inventions for bifocal lenses, the last dated May 5, 1908. The other defendants operate under such...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases