Roemer v. Simon
| Decision Date | 17 May 1887 |
| Citation | 31 F. 41 |
| Parties | ROEMER v. SIMON and others. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Arthur v. Briesen, for plaintiff.
J. E Hindon Hyde, for defendants.
A decree for an injunction against further infringement of the plaintiff's patent, and for an account of profits and damages, was before entered in this cause. 20 F. 197. It has now been heard on the plaintiff's exceptions to the master's report of nominal damages only. The patent is for a single feature of a lock for traveling bags.
The plaintiff has granted no licenses but has himself made and sold the locks separately and with bags, intending to supply the wants of the trade for them. He showed to the master that his profit upon these locks was 91 cents per dozen, and that the defendants had made and sold, with bags, 38,265 of them but made no further showing of their profits. The exceptions raised the question whether these facts furnish a sufficient basis for the estimation of damages beyond merely nominal damages.
Two defects are apparent in the plaintiff's claim in this respect-- one is that the case does not show that plaintiff's profits are due to the patented feature of the locks, in whole, or in any definite part; the other is that these facts do not show that the plaintiff would have had an opportunity to make and sell these locks if the defendants had not made and sold them with their bags. The case shows that there are other kinds of locks for such bags and they are mere incidents to the bags for their more convenient use. However it might be as to articles wholly covered by a patent for which there was no, or no convenient substitute, it does not follow in a case like this that a purchaser of the principal thing with a patented incident would go until he should find that particular kind of incident before purchasing. The form, material, or workmanship, of the bag itself may have been, and is quite likely to have been, as decisive with the purchaser as, and perhaps more so than, the lock. The plaintiff may have, and probably has, suffered damages from this infringement. He must show more than this, however, in order to recover them. He must, according to the cases, show what they are, or some reliable basis for estimating them. Garretson v. Clark, 111 U.S. 120, 4 S.Ct. 291; Black v. Thorne, 111 U.S. 122, 4 S.Ct. 326; Dobson v. Hartford Carpet Co., 114 U.S. 439, 5 S.Ct. 945; Dobson v. Dornan, 116 U.S. 10, 6...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Regis v. Jaynes
...105 F. 780, 45 C. C. A. 49; Kansas City Press Co. v. Devol (C. C.) 127 F. 363; Mosher v. Joyce, 51 F. 441, 2 C. C. A. 322; Roemer v. Simon (C. C.) 31 F. 41; Tuttle Gaylord (C. C.) 28 F. 97. But it seems to us that where, as here, a small article is sold with unlawful imitation of a trademar......
-
De Laski & Thropp Circular Woven Tire Co. v. Empire Rubber & Tire Co.
... ... Tatum v. Gregory, 51 F. 446, 447 (C.C., N.D. Cal.); ... Bell v. U.S. Stamping Co., 32 F. 549, 551 (C.C., ... S.D.N.Y.); Roemer v. Simon, 31 F. 41 (C.C., ... S.D.N.Y.); Hall v. Stern, 20 F. 788 (C.C., ... S.D.N.Y.); Zane v. Peck, 13 F. 475, 476 (C.C., ... The ... ...
-
Creamer v. Bowers
... ... 788; Hobbie v. Smith, 27 F ... 662; Royer v. Coupe, 29 F. 358; Lock Co. v ... Sargent, 117 U.S. 552, 6 S.Ct. 934; Roener v ... Simon, 31 F. 41. The allowance by the master of two ... dollars to the complainant on each infringing register made ... and used by the defendants is ... ...
-
Royer v. Shultz Belting Co.
...439, 5 S.Ct. 945; Dobson v. Dornan, 118 U.S. 10, 6 S.Ct. 946; Buerk v. Imhaeuser, 2 Ban.& A. 452; Bell v. Stamping Co., 32 F. 549; Roemer v. Simon, 31 F. 41; Pat. Sec. 1062. In the light of these principles, the evidence in the case at bar must be considered. The plaintiff's patent covers '......