Hunter Douglas Corp. v. Kwik-Kleen Venetian Blind Laundries, Inc.

128 F. Supp. 252, 105 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 86, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3658
District Court, S.D. California·Decided February 2, 1955·No. No. 16346·Published

Opinion

YANKWICH, Chief Judge.

The above-entitled cause heretofore tried, argued and submitted, is now decided as follows:

Judgment will be for the plaintiff adjudging the patent in suit to be valid and infringed, with injunction against further infringement and accounting for damages pursuant to Section 70 of Title 35 U.S.C.

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

Hunter Douglas Corp. v. Kwik-Kleen Venetian Blind Laundries, Inc., 128 F. Supp. 252, 105 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 86, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3658 (S.D. Cal. 1955).

128 F. Supp. 252 (Hunter Douglas Corp. v. Kwik-Kleen Venetian Blind Laundries, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sanitary Refrigerator Co. v. Winters
280 U.S. 30 (Supreme Court, 1929)
Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.
339 U.S. 605 (Supreme Court, 1950)
Baker-Cammack Hosiery Mills, Inc. v. Davis Co.
181 F.2d 550 (Fourth Circuit, 1950)
Patterson-Ballagh Corp. v. Moss
201 F.2d 403 (Ninth Circuit, 1953)
Samson-United Corp. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
103 F.2d 312 (Second Circuit, 1939)
Pointer v. Six Wheel Corporation
177 F.2d 153 (Ninth Circuit, 1949)
Rockwood v. General Fire Extinguisher Co.
8 F.2d 682 (Second Circuit, 1925)
Royal Typewriter Co. v. Remington Rand, Inc.
168 F.2d 691 (Second Circuit, 1948)
Ace Patents Corp. v. Exhibit Supply Co.
119 F.2d 349 (Seventh Circuit, 1941)
Edwards v. Hychex Products
171 F.2d 259 (Seventh Circuit, 1948)