AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number

PACIFIC PHONOGRAPH CO. v. SEARCHLIGHT HORN CO.

225 F. 500 (9th Cir. 1915) PACIFIC PHONOGRAPH CO. v. SEARCHLIGHT HORN CO. No. 2518. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. August 9, 1915

N. A. Acker and D. Hadsell, both of San Francisco, Cal., and J. Edgar Bull, of New York City, for appellant.

John H. Miller, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

Before GILBERT and ROSS, Circuit Judges, and WOLVERTON, District judge.

WOLVERTON, District Judge.

This case is akin to that of Sherman, Clay & Co. v. Searchlight Horn Co., 225 F. 497, . . . C.C.A. . . ., just decided. The appellant purchased from Thomas A. Edison, Incorporated. The latter company has also been sued by appellee in New Jersey. Neither company is a manufacturer of the infringing devices. The appellant petitioned for an injunction, the same as the defendant in the Sherman, Clay & Co. Case, making like allegations as to the seller being annoyed, harassed, etc., and the district court denied the injunction. The causes being of the same nature, the decision in the Sherman, Clay & Co. Case is decisive of this.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Pacific Phonograph Co. v. Searchlight Horn Co.
(Aug 9, 1915)