Wooster v. Howe Machine Co.

21 F. 67, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2335

This text of 21 F. 67 (Wooster v. Howe Machine Co.) 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
Wooster v. Howe Machine Co., 21 F. 67, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2335 (circtsdny 1884).

Opinion

Blatchford, Justice.

The decision herewith made, in Wooster v. Handy, ante, 51, requires that the bill in this case should be dismissed as to both of the reissued patents sued on, because of their invalidity as respeots claims 1, 7, 8, and 10 of the Pipo reissue, and claims 8 and 9 of the Bobjohn reissue; the dismissal to be with costs.

The same decision is made in the suits against the following defendants : The Singer Manufacturing Company, a New York corporation; the Wilcox & Gibbs Sewing-machine Company; the Domestic Sewing-machine Company, impleaded, etc.; Allen Schenck, impleaded, etc.; the Singer Manufacturing Company, a New Jersey corporation; and Charles B. Barker.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 F. 67, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wooster-v-howe-machine-co-circtsdny-1884.