Coppenbusen v. Folke

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Coppenbusen v. Folke

6 F. Cas. 523, 1862 U.S. App. LEXIS 550

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedFebruary 24, 1862

StatusPublished

This text of 6 F. Cas. 523 (Coppenbusen v. Folke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Coppenbusen v. Folke, 6 F. Cas. 523, 1862 U.S. App. LEXIS 550 (circtsdny 1862).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Both patents of L. Otto P. Meyer, known as the “tin foil” and the “oil” patents, for improved methods of vulcanizing hard rubber compound, embossed and plain surfaces, are valid; the re-issued patent covers no more than the original invention. It is also adjudged that the respondents have infringed both patents; that an injunction be issued, and an order of reference to account.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Both patents of L. Otto P. Meyer, known as the “tin foil” and the “oil” patents, for improved methods of vulcanizing hard rubber compound, embossed and plain surfaces, are valid; the re-issued patent covers no more than the original invention. It is also adjudged that the respondents have infringed both patents; that an injunction be issued, and an order of reference to account.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 F. Cas. 523, 1862 U.S. App. LEXIS 550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coppenbusen-v-folke-circtsdny-1862.