Case Name: MOTION PICTURE PATENTS CO. v. YANKEE FILM CO.; SAME v. WILLIAM STEINER et al.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1911-05-18
Citations: 187 F. 1007
Docket Number: 
Parties: MOTION PICTURE PATENTS CO. v. YANKEE FILM CO. SAME v. WILLIAM STEINER et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 187
Pages: 1007–1007

Head Matter:
MOTION PICTURE PATENTS CO. v. YANKEE FILM CO. SAME v. WILLIAM STEINER et al.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
May 18, 1911.)
Appeals from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. The patent in suit (Edison reissue patent No. 12,037) has four claims. In March, 1907, it was declared valid by this court as to claims 1, 2, and 3, and invalid as to claim 4. The bills of complaint in these suits were filed in November, 1910, and the complainant has never filed a disclaimer of claim 4.
For opinion below, see 183 Fed. 989. See, also, 188 Fed. 338.
Kenyon & Kenyon (Wm. Houston Kenyon, William J. Wallace, and Seward Davis, of counsel), for appellants.
J. Edgar Bull, for appellee.
Before COXE, WARD, and NOYES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The principal question presented upon these appeals is whether the complainant by its failure to enter a disclaimer of the claim declared invalid by this court has "unnecessarily neglected or delayed" and so lost its right to maintain suits for the infringement of the other claims. ^Vere we certain that all the facts were before us we should consider it our duty to examine the question upon its merits for the purpose of determining whether the Circuit Court should be directed to dismiss the bills. But the complainant insists that it has not had full opportunity to present the facts, and, in view of this contention, we shall go no further than to say that, in our opinion, the case presented is too doubtful to warrant the issuance of preliminary injunctions. . The orders of the Circuit Court are reversed, with costs.