Botsolas v. Schultz Laboratories

3 Citing cases

  1. Sunglass Designs, Inc. v. Wild Style Sunglasses

    No. CV-08-1984-PHX-DGC (D. Ariz. Sep. 1, 2009)

    Id. Plaintiff argues that the Court can make no inquiry into whether Defendants actually made a claim covered by the consent agreement, citing Botsolas v. Schultz Laboratories, 351 F. Supp. 188 (D.C. Cal. 1972). Botsolas is inapposite. It holds that where a court issues an injunction against further infringement of a patent pursuant to a consent decree, the Court will not inquire further into the validity of the patent. Id. at 190.

  2. McDermott v. Omid International Inc.

    723 F. Supp. 1221 (S.D. Ohio 1988)   Cited 1 times

    The addition of a nonfunctional element to an infringing product does not absolve that product from infringement. Eureka Tool Co. v. Wire Rope Appliance Co., 265 F. 673 (8th Cir. 1920); Hansen v. Siebring, 231 F. Supp. 634, 142 U.S.P.Q. 465 (N.D.Iowa 1964); Botsolas v. Schultz Laboratories, 351 F. Supp. 188 (C.D.Cal. 1972); Schlegel Mfg. Co. v. King Aluminum Corp., 381 F. Supp. 649 (S.D.Ohio 1974). 12.

  3. Wallace Clark Co., Inc., v. Acheson Industries

    401 F. Supp. 637 (S.D.N.Y. 1975)   Cited 3 times

    Shillitani v. United States, 384 U.S. 364, 368, 86 S.Ct. 1531, 16 L.Ed.2d 622 (1966); Gompers v. Buck's Stove Range Co., 221 U.S. 418, 449, 31 S.Ct. 492, 55 L.Ed. 797 (1911); International Business Machines Corp. v. United States, 493 F.2d 112, 115 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 995, 94 S.Ct. 2409, 40 L.Ed.2d 774 (1974).See, e.g., American St. Gobain Corp. v. Armstrong Glass Co., 434 F.2d 1216 (6th Cir. 1970); Crane Boom Life Guard Co. v. Saf-T-Boom Corp., 362 F.2d 317 (8th Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 908, 87 S.Ct. 853, 17 L.Ed.2d 782 (1967); Siebring v. Hansen, 346 F.2d 474 (8th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 943, 86 S.Ct. 400, 15 L.Ed.2d 352 (1967); Hopp Press, Inc. v. Joseph Freeman Co., 323 F.2d 636 (2d Cir. 1963); Botsolas v. Schultz Lab., 351 F. Supp. 188 (C.D.Cal. 1972). See also Union Tool Co. v. Wilson, 259 U.S. 107, 42 S.Ct. 427, 66 L.Ed. 848 (1922).