Smith-Warren Co. v. David Lupton's Sons Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

Smith-Warren Co. v. David Lupton's Sons Co.

139 F. 1008, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4749

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

DecidedOctober 13, 1905

DocketNo. 31

StatusPublished

This text of 139 F. 1008 (Smith-Warren Co. v. David Lupton's Sons Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Smith-Warren Co. v. David Lupton's Sons Co., 139 F. 1008, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4749 (circtedpa 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

The seventh and eighth grounds of demurrer seem to me to be well founded, but it does not follow that the bill must be dismissed. On the contrary, I think that the proper order is to strike out paragraphs 20, 21, 22, and 23, as containing what at present appears to be irrelevant matter, and require the defendants to answer the rest of the bill. If the answer sets up the Watkins patent as a justification for the defendants’ acts, it will be time enough then to consider what place in the art that patent is entitled to hold, and how far it may be affected by what was done in the office while the application was pending. The clerk is directed to enter the appropriate order.

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

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

The seventh and eighth grounds of demurrer seem to me to be well founded, but it does not follow that the bill must be dismissed. On the contrary, I think that the proper order is to strike out paragraphs 20, 21, 22, and 23, as containing what at present appears to be irrelevant matter, and require the defendants to answer the rest of the bill. If the answer sets up the Watkins patent as a justification for the defendants’ acts, it will be time enough then to consider what place in the art that patent is entitled to hold, and how far it may be affected by what was done in the office while the application was pending. The clerk is directed to enter the appropriate order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 F. 1008, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4749, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-warren-co-v-david-luptons-sons-co-circtedpa-1905.