Welling v. La Bau

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Welling v. La Bau

12 F. 875, 1882 U.S. App. LEXIS 2604

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided June 15, 1882·Published

Opinion

Wallace, C. ,T.

The defences of prior uso and anticipation are not well established. In view of the state of the art, the three patents of the complainant in controversy are to be limited to the composition of the specific ingredients in the substantial proportions described. The proofs fail to establish infringement of either patent, except No. 5,940. As to that patent a decree is ordered for an injunction and accounting; the injury upon the accounting to be confined to infringement consisting of the use of shellac and talc in equal parts substantially.

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

Wallace, C. ,T.

The defences of prior uso and anticipation are not well established. In view of the state of the art, the three patents of the complainant in controversy are to be limited to the composition of the specific ingredients in the substantial proportions described. The proofs fail to establish infringement of either patent, except No. 5,940. As to that patent a decree is ordered for an injunction and accounting; the injury upon the accounting to be confined to infringement consisting of the use of shellac and talc in equal parts substantially.

Welling v. La Bau, 12 F. 875, 1882 U.S. App. LEXIS 2604 (circtsdny 1882).

Pincite

12 F. 875 (Welling v. La Bau) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.