Tibbals v. Daby

S.D. New York

Tibbals v. Daby

11 F. 903, 1880 U.S. App. LEXIS 2777

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided December 6, 1880·Published

Opinion

Blatchford, C. J.

I am of opinion that it is shown that the defendant has infringed claim 1 of patent No. 79,534, and that nothing is proved sufficient to show that said claim is invalid. I am also of opinion that the defendant’s arrangement does not infringe claim 4, or 5, or 6 of patent No. 101,295, or any other claim of that patent. The usual decree will be entered for the plaintiff on claim 1 of patent No. 79,534, with costs.

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

Blatchford, C. J.

I am of opinion that it is shown that the defendant has infringed claim 1 of patent No. 79,534, and that nothing is proved sufficient to show that said claim is invalid. I am also of opinion that the defendant’s arrangement does not infringe claim 4, or 5, or 6 of patent No. 101,295, or any other claim of that patent. The usual decree will be entered for the plaintiff on claim 1 of patent No. 79,534, with costs.

Tibbals v. Daby, 11 F. 903, 1880 U.S. App. LEXIS 2777 (S.D.N.Y. 1880).

Pincite

11 F. 903 (Tibbals v. Daby) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.