1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 92 F.2d
  5. 92 F.2d 90 (1937)
 

MONARCH MARKING SYSTEM CO. v. DENNISON MFG. CO.

Nos. 7146-7149.

92 F.2d 90 (1937)

MONARCH MARKING SYSTEM CO. v. DENNISON MFG. CO. SAME v. MAY CO.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Rehearing Denied October 12, 1937.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Edmund P. Wood, of Cincinnati, Ohio (Truman A. Herron and Wood & Wood, all of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Fay, Oberlin & Fay, of Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for Monarch Marking System Co.

Robert Cushman, of Boston, Mass., and Arthur C. Denison, of Cleveland, Ohio (Charles D. Woodberry, of Boston, Mass., Baker, Hostetler, Sidlo & Patterson, of Cleveland, Ohio, and Roberts, Cushman & Woodberry of Boston, Mass., on the brief), for Dennison Mfg. Co. and May Co.

Before HICKS, SIMONS, and ALLEN, Circuit Judges.

HICKS, Circuit Judge.

The Monarch Marking System Company (herein called Monarch) brought suits against Dennison Manufacturing Company (herein called Dennison), as manufacturer, and the May Company, as user, of certain alleged infringing machines. Since the suits involved the same issues and Dennison defended both, by agreement, the cases were tried upon a single record.

Monarch sued as assignee-owner on: (1) Claims 2, 6, 20, 21, 22, 24, and 27 of Tily and...

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