General Electric Co. v. Condit Electrical Mfg. Co.

Citations

• 191 F. 511
• 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 5531

Syllabus

<p>1. Patents (§ 297*) — Suit bob Infringement — Pbeliminary Injunction.</p> <p>Where, in a suit for infringement, although the patent has been adjudged valid in a prior suit, an entirely new issue as to anticipation is raised and supported by testimony which is convincing if credited, unless such testimony is clearly impeached by complainant, his right is too doubtful to warrant the granting of a preliminary injunction.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — Por other eases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. § 488; Dec. Dig. ' § 297*</p> <p>Grounds for denial of preliminary injunctions in patent infringement suits, see note to Johnson v. Foos Mfg. Co., 72 C. C. A. 123.]</p> <p>2. Patents (§ 260*) — Infringement—What Constitutes.</p> <p>The violation of the sole right of a patentee to manufacture and sell the patented article cannot be justified by a special use, nor by an entire nonuse of the infringing article.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. § 359; Dec. Dig. § 260.*]</p> <p>3. Patents (§ 328*) — Validity and Infringement — Electric Switch.</p> <p>A preliminary injunction against infringement of the Hewlett & Emmet patent, No. 800,916. for a removable oil can, high potential electric switch denied, but granted as to the Emmet & Hewlett patent, No. 789,-597, for a high potential switch.</p>