Arthur Loomis Sanborn
How Judge Sanborn rules, drawn from 29 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Sanborn decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Sanborn treated repeated adjudications and widespread public acquiescence as powerful support for interim patent relief.
“There is no question of the validity of the patent which has been several times adjudicated, and whose validity has been acquiesced in by the public almost universally.”
Sanborn required the statutory intent element before treating butter as adulterated for tax purposes.
“Under the statute it must appear that there was an intent to cause the absorption of an abnormal quantity of water.”
Procedural preferences
Sanborn favored resolving closely connected patent and unfair-competition counterclaims in one action.
“These matters ought to be all disposed of in one suit, as they relate to questions very closely connected together.”
Sanborn treated an order granting a new trial as interlocutory and therefore open to reconsideration before final judgment.
“The order of February 24, 1913, granting a new trial for an insufficient reason, should be set aside”
Cautions
Sanborn enforced jurisdictional limits even when the result prevented a claim from reaching its merits.
“It is not an agreeable duty to be obliged to dismiss on a technical ground like this; but I am convinced that the maritime law gives no lien, and that the libel must therefore be dismissed.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“claims 6 and 7, are infringed, and the others not”
“In the absence of any intent to adulterate the butter, or produce an abnormal quantity of water, it was held that the case was not within the statute.”
“Defendant having confessed to a technical breach of the law, judgment against it for costs only should be entered.”
“A decree should be entered for complainants, finding infringement in making and selling Exhibits 3 and 8, and equivalent devices, and for an injunction an.d accounting, with costs.”
“Complainants are entitled to decree for a perpetual injunction, and for damages and profits.”
“I think the order of the referee should be reversed.”
The opinion explains why the indictment’s statutory theory failed but does not state a final dispositive command in the published text.
“The motion in arrest of judgment is denied.”
“The motion of the defendant to intervene is allowed”
“the motions of the plaintiff to strike out portions of the answer and six interrogatories are denied.”
“The order of February 24, 1913, granting a new trial for an insufficient reason, should be set aside; plaintiff to' have until April 16, 1915, to give notice that he desires a new trial”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
No assigned docket records were returned for Sanborn’s tenure, so no caseload mix or case-duration summary is available.
Draft for Judge Sanborn with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Sanborn, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Sanborn's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace