Upon rehearing we see no reason to modify the views heretofore expressed, or to change the result already announced in tins cast'. The decree of tlie circuit court is reversed, and tlrt* cause remanded, with directions to dismiss the bill, with costs.
70 F. 65
ANDREWS et al. v. THUM et al.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit.
June 11, 1895.)
No. 89.
Appeal from tlie Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts.
This was a bill in equity by Otto and William Thum against John A. .Andrews, William Y. Wadleigh, B. F. Ilullard, and William A. Dole, trading under the name of John A. Andrews & Co., for alleged inflingen lent of letters patent No. 278,204, issued May 22, 1883, and No. 805,118, issued September 16, 1884, both to Otto Thu«n, for improvements relating to iiy paper. The circuit court rendered a decree for complainants (58 Fed. 84), and defendants appealed. A petition to dismiss the appeal was denied by this court (12 O. C. A. 77, (it Fed. 149); and, the case being afterwards heard on the merits of the appeal, a decree was entered reversing the decree below, and remanding the cause, with directions to dismiss (he bill. 15 0. 0. A. 67, 67 Fed. 911. After the entry of this decree, the present rehearing was allowed.
John M. I’erkins, for appellants.
Thomas J. .Johnston, for appellees.
Before COLT, Circuit Judge, and WEBB and ALDBIOH, District Judges.
Andrews v. Thum
70 F. 65
Case Details
70 F. 65
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!