Case ID: f_11/html/0903-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Blatchford, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Tibbals v. Daby.
    
      (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    
    December 6, 1880.)
    Patents — Inpbingement—Deceee.
    Where one claim of a patent was infri nged and the others were not, the usual decree will be entered.
    
      A. v. Briesen, for plaintiff.
    
      G. H. Yeoman, for defendant.
   Blatchford, C. J.

I am of opinion that it is shown that the defendant has infringed claim 1 of patent No. 79,534, and that nothing is proved sufficient to show that said claim is invalid. I am also of opinion that the defendant’s arrangement does not infringe claim 4, or 5, or 6 of patent No. 101,295, or any other claim of that patent. The usual decree will be entered for the plaintiff on claim 1 of patent No. 79,534, with costs.