FRANTZ

v.

WEST VIRGINIA

Citator

Cited By

• Husty v. United States, 282 U.S. 694 (U.S. 1931)
  …offenses. The proviso is only a [*703] guide to the discretion of the court in imposing the increased sentences for those offenses for which an increased penalty is authorized by the Act. See Ross v. United States, 37 F. (2d) 557; certiorari denied, 281 U. S. 767. McElvogue v. United States, 40 F. (2d) 889; certiorari denied, post. 3. The sentence imposed on each of the petitioners exceeded the maximum penalty for illegal possession under- § 29 of the National Prohibition Act, which is, for á first offense,…
• Magnavox Co. v. Hart & Reno, 73 F.2d 433 (9th Cir. 1934)
  …iomatic in the patent law that infringement depends, not upon what is manufactured or [*446] sold by tbe patentee, but upon what he has patented. In Grand Rapids Show Case Co. v. Weber Show Case & Fixture Co., 38 F.(2d) 730, 731, certiorari denied, 281 U. S. 767, 50 S. Ct. 465, 74 L. Ed. 1174, the late Judge Dietrich, of this court, said: “It may be true that the eases which appellant [the patentee] actually manufactures and markets much more ■closely resemble the defendant’s structure, but its suit is nece…
• Doerning v. United States, 49 F.2d 44 (6th Cir. 1931)
  …no such power. “The proviso is only a guide to the discretion of the court in imposing the increased sentences for those offenses for which an increased penalty is authorized by the act. See Ross v. U. S. (C. C. A.) 37 F.(2d) 557, certiorari denied 281 U. S. 767, 50 S. Ct. 466, 74 L. Ed. 1175; McElvogue v. U. S. (C. C. A.) 40 F.(2d) 889, certiorari denied 282 U. S. 845, 51 S. Ct. 24, 75 L. Ed.-, Oct. 13, 1930.” Husty v. U. S., 51 S. Ct. 240, 242, 75 L. Ed. -, decided by the Supreme Court Feb. 24,1931. Othe…