PLATT, CHIEF JUDGE, U. S. DISTRICT COURT,

v.

MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING CO.

Citator

Cited By

• Reisman v. Caplin, 375 U.S. 440 (U.S. 1964)
  …ient privilege. The Court of Appeals affirmed, but on the entirely different theory that the suit was, in substance, one against the United States to which it had not consented [*443]. 115 U. S. App. D. C. 59, 317 F. 2d 123. We granted certiorari, 374 U. S. 825, and have concluded that petitioners have an adequate remedy at law and that the complaint is therefore subject to dismissal for want of equity. This obviates our passing upon any of the other questions presented. I. Petitioner Reisman, an attorne…
• Compco Corp. v. Day-Brite Lighting, Inc., 376 U.S. 234 (U.S. 1964)
  …d it so closely as to make confusion likely.” 311 F. 2d, at 30. A design which identifies its maker to the trade, the Court of Appeals held, is a “protectable” right under Illinois law, even though the design is unpatentable.3 We granted certiorari. 374 U. S. 825. To support its findings of likelihood of confusion and actual confusion, the trial court was able to refer to only one circumstance in the record. A plant manager who had installed some of Compco’s fixtures later asked Day-Brite to service the fix…
• Platt v. Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co., 376 U.S. 240 (U.S. 1964)
  …findings for those of the trial judge and ordered the case transferred. 314 F. 2d 369. Chief Judge Hastings dissented. [*242] We granted the petition for certiorari in view of the importance of the questions to the prosecution of multi-venue cases. 374 U. S. 825. We believe that the Court of Appeals erred in ordering the transfer and therefore vacate its judgment and remand the case for further consideration by the District Court. I. A grand jury sitting at Danville, in the United States District Court fo…