Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

HIRAM A. FARRAND, INC. v. MCCRORY STORES CORP.

October 27, 1933

HIRAM A. FARRAND, Inc., et al.
v.
McCRORY STORES CORPORATION et al.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: CAMPBELL

CAMPBELL, District Judge.

This suit is brought by the plaintiff for relief by way of injunction against the trustees as well as against the original defendants, from the alleged infringement of the following patents, issued by the United States Patent Office:

No. 1,402,589, issued to Hiram A. Farrand, for rule, granted January 3, 1922, on an application filed October 23, 1919;

 No. 1,799,044; issued to Hiram A. Farrand, assignor to Hiram A. Farrand, Inc., for means for controlling resilient rules, granted March 31, 1931, on an application filed July 5, 1929;

 No. 1,799,094, issued to Hiram A. Farrand, assignor to Hiram A. Farrand, Inc., for means for controlling resilient rules, granted March 31, 1931, on an application filed October 5, 1928;

 No. 1,828,401, issued to Hiram A. Farrand, assignor to Hiram A. Farrand, Inc., for resilient rule, granted October 20, 1931, on an application filed October 21, 1926

 and for an order requiring the surrender or destruction of all the alleged infringing devices, together with taxable costs.

 The suit was originally brought against McCrory Stores Corporation and J.G. McCrory Company, both of the said defendants being charged with infringement of the said four patents.

 In January, 1933, both of the said original defendants went into voluntary bankruptcy, and subsequent thereto the defendant Irving Trust Company was elected or appointed trustee in bankruptcy for each of said original defendants.

 On August 5, 1933, leave of the court having been first obtained, a supplemental bill was filed joining the trustees for the respective original parties defendant.

 The title to the several patents in suit is in the plaintiff Hiram A. Farrand, Inc., and the plaintiff Stanley Works is the exclusive licensee.

 The defendant McCrory Stores Corporation is a holding corporation, owning the entire capital stock of the J.G. McCrory Company, and directing and controlling its operations.

 The defendant J.G. McCrory Company is engaged in operating a chain of stores, including one located at 502 Fulton street, Brooklyn, N.Y., from which the devices charged to infringe, and offered in evidence herein as Exhibits 5 and 7, were purchased; the first of these rules, Exhibit 5, having been purchased prior to the filing of the original bill, and the second of these rules, Exhibit 7, having been purchased from an employee of the trustee prior to the filing of the supplemental bill, and is included in the issues of this case. The said Exhibit 7 is known and described by the name "mechanics' Pal."

 The defendants did not introduce in evidence any prior art, either patented or otherwise, nor was any testimony offered which affected the validity of any of the patents in suit. The validity of the patents in suit was not attacked, and the prima facie presumption of validity must prevail.

 This suit is based upon all of the eighteen claims of patent No. 1,402,589, claim 21 of patent No. 1,799,044, claims 1 and 2 of patent No. 1,799,094, and claims 10 to 20, inclusive, of patent No. 1,828,401.

 Patent No. 1,402,589 covers broadly a concavo-convex measuring strip of resilient metal, a holder comprising a rotatably mounted cup into which the strip may be interiorally wound, i.e., the inner end of the strip is coiled against the vertical walls of the cup, and the succeeding coils are spiraled inwardly toward the center of the cup, until the inner end of the strip is reached, which is accessible for withdrawal by lateral displacement. There is also provided for the device disclosed in this patent a U-shaped bridgelike member, attached to the center stud around which the cup rotates, and extending over the side walls of the rotatable cup and into the cup, and which acts as a combined brake and guide for the control of the strip when it is introduced into or removed from the cup.

 Claim 1 is typical of the broad claims, and claim 10 of the more detailed claims.

 Claim 1 reads as follows: "1. The combination of a holder and a flexible rule coiled therein with its inner end free and accessible for withdrawal; with means for guiding the inner end of the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.