Case ID: f_53/html/0380-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "COXE, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LALANCE & GROSJEAN MANUF'G CO. v. MOSHEIM.
    (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    December 22, 1892.)
    In Equity. Bill by tbe Balance & Grosjean Manufacturing Company for infringement of a patent. Decree for complainant.
   COXE, District Judge.

The decision in the preceding cause (53 Fed. Rep. 375) disposes of this cause also. It is conceded that the defendant sold tbe articles in proof made by tbe Habermann Company. Tbe second claim is intended to cover the product of tbe process described in tbe first claim, and, thus limited, I think it is valid and that tbe defendant has infringed.

Tbe complainant is entitled to tbe usual decree upon tbe second claim