Hicks v. Beardsley

32 F. 281, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2750

This text of 32 F. 281 (Hicks v. Beardsley) 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
Hicks v. Beardsley, 32 F. 281, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2750 (circtsdny 1887).

Opinion

Lacombe, J.

The complainant moves for a preliminary injunction to restrain infringement of a certain patent (No. 126,347) for fire-kindlers. The patent was granted to D. W. Thompson, in 1872, and assigned to complainant in August last, a few days before the bringing of this suit. Defendants do not manufacture the articles which it is claimed infringe the Thompson patent; they obtain them from one George S. Geer, against whom complainant has a suit pending in the Northern district of this [282]*282state. No preliminary injunction has been granted in the Geer suit; complainant’s motion for that relief having been denied, with leave to renew. The validity of the Thompson patent is vigorously assailed by the defendants, many prior patents for fire-kindlers being submitted with the opposing affidavits.

In view of all the facts, the manufacturer being a resident of the Northern district where he has been regularly served, and has appeared by counsel, the motion for a preliminary injunction is denied, with leave to renew when an injunction, preliminary or final, is obtained against the manufacturer.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 F. 281, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2750, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hicks-v-beardsley-circtsdny-1887.