TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Tolman Bros. Mfg. Co. v. Silberstein

Tolman Bros. Mfg. Co. v. Silberstein, 176 F. 373 (1909)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · Historical Federal Courts
Decided
December 16, 1909
Judges
Noyes
Citations
176 F. 3731909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5784
Disposition
Application denied.
Headnotes
Patents (§ 312*) — Suit foe Infringement — Peeliminart Injunction. Evidence held insufficient to warrant the granting of a preliminary injunction against infringement of an unadjudieated patent, or to restrain alleged unfair competition. [Ed. Note — For other eases, see Patents, Dec. Dig. § 312.* Grounds for denying temporary injunctions in patent infringement suits, see note to Johnson v. Foos Mfg. Co., 72 C. C. A. 123.]
Summary
In Equity. Suit by the Tolman Bros. Manufacturing Company against Albert L. Silberstein. On motion for preliminary injunction.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Noyes

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

NOYES, Circuit Judge.

The patent in suit has never been adjudicated, and the defendant asserts that he intends to contest its validity. The affidav its and earlier patents show that there is a serious question as to its novelty. The proof as to long-continued acquiescence is not sufficient. Regarded as a suit to restrain the infringement of a patent, the case is too doubtful to warrant the issuance of a preliminary injunction.

If it be possible to regard tlie suit as one to restrain unfair competition, the same conclusion must be reached. The affidavits fail to show imitation of the complainant’s article in unessential particulars.

The application for a preliminary injunction is denied.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list