1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 40 F.2d
  5. 40 F.2d 708 (1930)
 

CLAUDE NEON ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS v. BRILLIANT TUBE SIGN CO.

No. 601.

40 F.2d 708 (1930)

CLAUDE NEON ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS, Inc., v. BRILLIANT TUBE SIGN CO. et al.

District Court, W. D. Washington, N. D.

March 28, 1930.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

William Bohleber, of New York City, Leonard S. Lyon and R. E. Caughey, both of Los Angeles, Cal., and G. Wright Arnold, of Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff.

Caldwell & Lycette, Weldon G. Bettens, Dean H. Eastman, and C. L. Reynolds, all of Seattle, Wash., for defendants.

CUSHMAN, District Judge.

At the threshold of the case the court is asked to uphold the validity of the patent on two grounds. First, by virtue of the doctrine of comity; second, because of the presumption of validity arising from the grant of the patent, reenforced by reason of the great and rapid success of the patented invention. As consideration of the two foregoing matters, in one particular at least, converge upon the same point of fact, they will be considered...

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