SOLEX LABORATORIES v. GRAHAM

Civ. Nos. 19497, 19498, 19558, 19679, 19986, 20484.

165 F.Supp. 428 (1958)

SOLEX LABORATORIES, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Robert GRAHAM; John L. Roberts d.b.a. John L. Roberts Optical Co.; M. Charles May; George W. Spratt Optical Company, Doctors Contact Lens Service, Inc., and Sterling P. Dunham; Dr. Barry Bleeck; and M. Lon Kasow, Defendants. SOLEX LABORATORIES, Inc., Plaintiff, v. John L. ROBERTS, d.b.a. John L. Roberts Optical Co., Defendant. SOLEX LABORATORIES, Inc., Plaintiff, v. M. Charles MAY, Defendant. SOLEX LABORATORIES, Inc., Plaintiff, v. GEORGE W. SPRATT OPTICAL COMPANY, Doctors Contact Lens Service, Inc., and Sterling P. Dunham, Defendants. SOLEX LABORATORIES, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Dr. Barry BLEECK, Defendant. SOLEX LABORATORIES, Inc., Plaintiff, v. M. Lon KASOW, Defendant.

United States District Court S. D. California, Central Division.

August 6, 1958.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Hazard & Miller, by Allan D. Mockabee, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff.

Bair, Freeman & Molinare, Chicago, Ill., by Will Freeman, A. W. Molinare, W. M. Van Sciver, Chicago, Ill., and William Douglas Sellers, Pasadena, Cal., for defendants Robert Graham; John L. Roberts, d.b.a. John L. Roberts Optical Co.; and M. Charles May.

Mason & Graham, by Collins Mason, Los Angeles, Cal., and Martineau & Martineau, by L. R. Martineau, and Glenn B. Martineau, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendants George W. Spratt Optical Co., Doctors Contact Lens Service, Inc., and Sterling P. Dunham.

Mason & Graham by Collins Mason, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant Dr. Barry Bleeck.

Lyon & Lyon, by Reginald E. Caughey, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant M. Lon Kasow.


TOLIN, District Judge.

This patent infringement litigation concerns but one patent. There are several separately filed cases which have been consolidated for trial. There are different accused structures in the various cases. The patent is not a stranger to this District Court. In the unreported case of Solex Laboratories v. Pacific Contact Laboratories, another Judge of this Court held it valid. The decision was affirmed on appeal.1 Attorneys...

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