1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 37 F.Supp.
  5. 37 F.Supp. 922 (1941)
 

NEW WRINKLE v. FRITZ

No. 188.

37 F.Supp. 922 (1941)

NEW WRINKLE, Inc., v. FRITZ et al.

District Court, W. D. New York.

March 3, 1941.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

John S. Powers, of Buffalo, N. Y., and Toulmin & Toulmin, of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff.

Albert R. Henry, of Buffalo, N.Y. (Dike, Calver & Gray, of Boston, Mass., of counsel), for defendants.

KNIGHT, District Judge.

The defendant took certain depositions purporting to show tests made following the formula of the Hadfield Patent No. 1,252,001 and the teachings of the Stevens Publications "Patents, Technology, and Bibliography of China Wood Oil" and "China Wood Oil Formulary" to show anticipation of the patent in suit. It is urged by the plaintiff that the depositions taken relative to these tests are incompetent and the depositions should not be received...

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