Chester Forging & Engineering Co. v. Tindel-Morris Co.

Citations

• 165 F. 899
• 91 C.C.A. 577
• 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4817

Syllabus

<p>1. Injunction (§ 136*) — Prki,thinary Injunction —Authority of Court to Grant — Pending Demurrer to Bii.i,.</p> <p>While as a rule a preliminary injunction should not be granted while a demurrer to the bill is pending, such rule is subject to exceptions; and where on examining the bill and demurrer the court is not satisfied that the demurrer will be sustained, and on the proofs submitted allegations of fraud made in the bill are clearly proven,- the court has, within reasonable bounds, a discretionary power to preserve the existing status of tilings by a preliminary injunction to prevent the carrying out of the fraud until the demurrer is disposed of.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.— For other cases, see Injunction, Cent. Dig. §§ 305, 306; Dee. Dig. § 130*]</p> <p>2. Patents (§ 209*) — Suit for Infringement — Right of Action for Threatened Infringement.</p> <p>A federal court of equity may entertain a suit to enjoin infringement of a patent where it is threatened, although no act of infringement had been completed when the bill was filed.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 478, 479; Dee. Dig. § 2i)9.*J</p> <p>3. Patents (§ 297*) — Suit for Infringement — Preliminary Injunction.</p> <p>Where a hill for infringement of patents alleged that defendant had obtained the parts of the patented machines from complainant by fraud, and was engaged in putting them together with the intent to use the machines in infringement of the patents, and the proofs on a motion for a preliminary injunction clearly sustained such allegation, the fact that the validity of the patents had not been adjudicated did not require the court to refuse the injunction.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. § 481; Dec. Dig. § 297.*</p> <p>Grounds for denial of preliminary injunction in patent infringement suits, see note to Johnson v. Foos Mfg. Co., 72 O. C. A. 123.]</p>