J.J. Warren Co. v. Rosenblatt
Decision Date | 14 May 1897 |
Docket Number | 402. |
Citation | 80 F. 540 |
Parties | J. J. WARREN CO. v. ROSENBLATT. [1] |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
The J J. Warren Company, the appellant, as assignee of the patentees, filed its bill to restrain the infringement of letters patent of the United States No. 444,642, issued January 13, 1891, to Thomas Gaskell Allen, Jr., William Louis Sachtleben, and John Forrest Walters for 'luggage carrier for cycles.' The answer denied patentable novelty and invention, and asserted that the alleged invention required nothing more than the exercise of mere mechanical skill, and that the letters patent were invalid. Testimony was taken upon the part of the complainant below solely upon the question of infringement, and which established such infringement. The defendant introduced by stipulation a certain old medicine case in use in 1889. At the hearing the bill was dismissed for want of equity, and upon the ground that the patent was invalid. The specification of the patent contains the following:
The luggage carrier occupies the space between the arch, strut, and tie of a safety bicycle, and is of the form and shape of that space, and by straps and buckle fasteners is attached to the arch and strut and other portions of the cycle; the specification further stating that'
The claim of the patent is as follows: 'A hold-all, adapted to fit within the space between the arch, strut, and tie of a cycle-machine, and composed of two side plates, A, B. edge strip, C, one of the side plates being provided with a flap D, to fold downward, and coverable by...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Spring-Air Co. v. Ragains
...Patents, Deller's Ed., pp. 1272, 1273, § 276. However, this presumption of validity is rebuttable and not conclusive. J. J. Warren Co. v. Rosenblatt, 7 Cir., 80 F. 540, certiorari denied 168 U.S. 710, 18 S.Ct. 943, 42 L.Ed. 1211; Dennis v. Great Northern Ry. Co., D. C., 51 F.2d 796; Reynold......
-
Crosley Corp. v. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co.
...must be given due weight, but it cannot be allowed to stand in the face of definitely contrary facts. In J. J. Warren Co. v. Rosenblatt, 7 Cir., 80 F. 540, at page 543, the Court said: "A certain presumption in favor of the validity of the patent arises from the action of the patent office ......
-
Lettelier v. Mann
... ... courts authority to declare what constitutes novelty and ... invention. Warren Co. v. Rosenblatt, 25 C.C.A. 625, ... 80 F. 540. I am satisfied that the claims of ... ...
-
Callison v. Dean, 932.
...prior art and skilled in that art, involves mere mechanical skill. In re Stovall (Cust. & Pat. App.) 63 F.(2d) 985; J. J. Warren Co. v. Rosenblatt (C. C. A. 7) 80 F. 540, 542; Donner v. Sheer Pharmacal Corp. (C. C. A. 8) 64 F.(2d) 217, 221; Fisher Governor Co. v. C. F. Camp Co. (C. C. A. 10......