1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 31 F.Supp.
  5. 31 F.Supp. 115 (1940)
 

SCOVILL MFG. CO. v. UNITED STATES ELECTRIC MFG. CORP.

31 F.Supp. 115 (1940)

SCOVILL MFG. CO. v. UNITED STATES ELECTRIC MFG. CORPORATION.

District Court, S. D. New York.

January 24, 1940.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Frederic P. Warfield, of New York City, and Francis T. Reeves, of Waterbury, Conn., of counsel, for plaintiff.

Morris Kirschstein, of New York City, for defendant.

WOOLSEY, District Judge.

My judgment in this cause, for the reasons hereinafter stated, is —

1. That the single claim of each of the three design patents, namely, Tompkins No. 99,316, No. 99,336 and No. 101,800, and Claims Nos. 1, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13 and 14 of the mechanical patent, Tompkins No. 2,097,222, are invalid for lack of invention.

2. That the plaintiff has not any locus standi to claim infringement of the trademark "Streamlite", No. 344...

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