Rudolph v. Eisen

D. New Jersey

Rudolph v. Eisen

38 F. Supp. 868, 49 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 239, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3351

CourtDistrict Court, D. New Jersey

DecidedApril 3, 1941

DocketNo. 1127

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 38 F. Supp. 868 (Rudolph v. Eisen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rudolph v. Eisen, 38 F. Supp. 868, 49 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 239, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3351 (D.N.J. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

WALKER, District'Judge.

The jurisdiction of the federal court over a patent infringement suit against a nonresident defendant depends upon the existence of facts prescribed in Section 109, United States Code Annotated, Title 28. The affidavits of the plaintiff show facts, which if established at the time of trial, give this court jurisdiction. Therefore the motion of the defendant is denied. '

The plaintiff must remember that in a suit for patent infringement, he has the burden of establishing the jurisdictional facts,¹ and if he fails to establish a regular place of business of the defendant within the district or acts of infringement committed within the district, this court is without jurisdiction.²

An order should be presented.

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

WALKER, District'Judge.

The jurisdiction of the federal court over a patent infringement suit against a nonresident defendant depends upon the existence of facts prescribed in Section 109, United States Code Annotated, Title 28. The affidavits of the plaintiff show facts, which if established at the time of trial, give this court jurisdiction. Therefore the motion of the defendant is denied. '

The plaintiff must remember that in a suit for patent infringement, he has the burden of establishing the jurisdictional facts,¹ and if he fails to establish a regular place of business of the defendant within the district or acts of infringement committed within the district, this court is without jurisdiction.²

An order should be presented.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 F. Supp. 868, 49 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 239, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rudolph-v-eisen-njd-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack