Stitt v. Eastern R. Co.
Decision Date | 18 December 1884 |
Citation | 22 F. 649 |
Parties | STITT, Trustee, v. EASTERN R. CO. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts |
C. M Reed, for complainant.
A McCallum, for defendant.
This is an action at law to recover damages for alleged infringement of letters patent No. 147,863, granted to George Richards February 24, 1874, for 'improvement in perches for dumping cars. ' The only question before the court is whether the patent is void for want of novelty under the following circumstances contained in the agreed statement of facts:
'That the drawings above mentioned, of which Exhibits A, B, and C are copies, have ever since been, and now are, at the shop of said Portland Company, in said...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Johnson & Johnson v. Kendall Company
...Linen Co., 82 F. 228 (D.C.1897); Picard v. United Aircraft Corporation, 128 F.2d 632, 634-635 (C.A.2, 1942); Stitt, Trustee, v. Eastern R. Co., 22 F. 649 (C.C. 1884). 40 Plaintiff points out the "many printed publications" are not really that but are the abandoned Cederroth application and ......
-
Chicopee Mfg. Corp. v. Columbus Fiber Mills Co., Civ. A. No. 631.
...use" or "on sale" of the invention under Section 102(b) "the primary inquiry is one of identity between two things." Stitt v. Eastern R. Co., D.C. Mass.1884, 22 F. 649, 651. Indeed, the language of 35 U.S.C.A. § 103 refers to Section 102 as requiring that the invention be "identically discl......
-
Picard v. United Aircraft Corporation, 244.
...Brush v. Condit, 132 U.S. 39, 44-48, 10 S.Ct. 1, 33 L.Ed. 251; Parker v. Ferguson, Fed. Cas.No.10,733, 1 Blatchf. 407; Stitt v. Eastern Railway Co., C.C., 22 F. 649. Our own decision in Universal Winding Co. v. Willimantic Linen Co., 2 Cir., 92 F. 391, accepting in this respect Judge Townse......
-
Application of Schlittler, Patent Appeal No. 6263.
...citing Reed v. Cutter, 20 Fed. Cas. page 435, No. 11,645, 1 Story 590, 599; Coffin v. Ogden, 18 Wall. 120, 21 L.Ed. 821; Stitt v. Eastern R. Co., C.C., 22 F. 649, 650; Imperial Brass Mfg. Co. v. Nelson, 7 Cir., 203 F. 484; and Buser v. Novelty Tufting Machine Co., 6 Cir., 151 F. In Coffin v......