This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Ely (P) made and sold safes with explosive chambers in them that were designed to protect against burglars. P had letters patent which held this feature as one of their distinctive features. The public had come to recognize the value of an explosive chamber because of P's efforts. P alleged that D infringed upon its patent and further that D sold safes without an explosive chamber and falsely told customers that a band around the door of its safes was used to cover and close an explosion chamber. P alleged that customers had been led to buy safes from D based on this misrepresentation. All the safes were clearly marked as D’s product. P asked for an injunction against D selling safes with the metal bands and against representing that the safes contained an explosion chamber. The case was dismissed, and P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.