Maltby v. Graham

35 F. 206, 1888 U.S. App. LEXIS 2443

This text of 35 F. 206 (Maltby v. Graham) 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
Maltby v. Graham, 35 F. 206, 1888 U.S. App. LEXIS 2443 (circtsdny 1888).

Opinion

Lacombe, J.

This is an application to restrain the infringement of reissued letters patent No. 5,502, granted to George J. Capewell, July 29, 1873, for a nail extractor. The original patent was granted July 16, 1872. The patent has been twice sustained in this circuit. Maltby v. Converse, Maltby v. Tool Co. It is true that the Taft patent of 1870 (107,121) was not then before the court, but the Pish patent of 1866, (58,626,) which embodies the same principle, was then considered. The defendant’s nail extractor plainly infringes. Motion granted. The propositions which defendants seek to sustain amount to a rehearing of the two cases before Judges Wallace and Shipman, and may be presented at final hearing.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 F. 206, 1888 U.S. App. LEXIS 2443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maltby-v-graham-circtsdny-1888.