1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 213 F.Supp.
  5. 213 F.Supp. 494 (1962)
 

STIEGELE v. JACQUES KREISLER MANUFACTURING CORP.

213 F.Supp. 494 (1962)

Karl E. STIEGELE and Speidel Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. JACQUES KREISLER MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, Defendant.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

September 19, 1962.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Harry R. Pugh, Jr., Fish, Richardson & Neave, New York City, Robert L. Thompson, Dike, Thompson, Bronstein & Mrose, Boston, Mass., of counsel, for plaintiffs.

Shenier & O'Connor, New York City, for defendant.

LEVET, District Judge.

Defendant moves to dismiss this action for patent infringement alleging that venue is improperly laid in this district.

Venue in patent infringement actions is determined solely by Title 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Products Corp., 353 U.S. 222, 77 S.Ct. 787, 1 L.Ed.2d 786 (1957). The provisions of venue for a non-resident corporation are that the alleged corporate infringer...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases