Dunham Manuf'g Co. v. Coburn Trolley Track Manuf'g Co.

65 F. 98, 1891 U.S. App. LEXIS 1693
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
DecidedMarch 7, 1891
DocketNo. 2,815
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 65 F. 98 (Dunham Manuf'g Co. v. Coburn Trolley Track Manuf'g Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dunham Manuf'g Co. v. Coburn Trolley Track Manuf'g Co., 65 F. 98, 1891 U.S. App. LEXIS 1693 (circtdma 1891).

Opinion

COLT, Circuit Judge.

This cause came on to be heard upon motion-of complainant for a preliminary injunction, and was argued by counsel for respective parties, and now, to wit, March 7, 1891, it is ordered by the court that writ of injunction issue as prayed for in the bill of complaint herein, enjoining and restraining said defendants from directly or indirectly making, constructing, using, or vending in others, to be- used, any door hangers or other articles containing or embodying the invention secured and described in the second and [99]*99third claims of the United States letters patent, numbered 7,795 of reissues, reissued July 17, 1877, to Elias E. Pratt* for improvement in door-hanging devices, until the further order of court.

See Pratt v. Sencenbaugh, 64 Fed. 779.

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

Related

Pratt v. Sencenbaugh
64 F. 779 (U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
65 F. 98, 1891 U.S. App. LEXIS 1693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunham-manufg-co-v-coburn-trolley-track-manufg-co-circtdma-1891.