Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patent rolls Court: us supreme court Page 1 of about 10,893 results (0.094 seconds)

P.V. Hemalatha Vs. Kattamkandi Puthiya Maliackal Saheeda and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2002SC2445; 2002(5)ALT19(SC); 2002(2)BLJR1626; [2002(3)JCR34(SC)]; JT2002(Suppl1)SC494; 2002(2)KLT792(SC); 2002(4)SCALE662; (2002)5SCC548; [2002]3SCR1098

..... court could be availed of in relation to the territory falling in malabar district of erstwhile madras state and now forming new state of kerala, came to the conclusion that clause 36 of madras letters patent of high court does not cover a situation as is obtaining in cases before them where the two judges differed on all issues of fact and law, have delivered two different judgments and not found necessary ..... that the expression 'other jurisdiction' used in section 52 preceded by such words 'original and appellate' is an expression of wide import and would, therefore, include clause 36 of letters patent of madras high court which governs subject matter of power and jurisdiction of one or more judges of that high court in the event of difference of opinion between them. ..... it is on such understanding of the procedural provisions contained in the code, travancore-cochin act, and the kerala act read with clause 36 of the letters patent of madras high court that the judges forming the division bench came to the conclusion that there is no other option before them except to confirm the decree of the subordinate court in accordance with sub ..... the two learned judges also considered the argument, which is now being advanced before us on behalf of the petitioner, that the letters patent of the high court of madras containing clause 36 could be invoked to resolve the difference of opinion between two judges both on questions of fact and law by referring the case for the opinion of one or more .....

Evans Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

..... 1944) (adam of lung (1298)) (was convicted of extortion for accepting payment to spare a man from having to contribute to an official collection of a quantity of malt); 10 calendar of patent rolls, edward iii, a. d. ..... 449 (1909) (hugh de elmeshale (1356)) (coroner would not perform his "office without great ransoms and that he used to extort money from the people by false and feigned indictments"); calendar of patent rolls, edward ii, a. d. ..... , 36 lincoln record society, a lincolnshire assize roll for 1298, p. 74, no. .....

Morgan Envelope Co. Vs. Albany Paper Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... fixtures manufactured and sold by the plaintiff, in combination with its (the plaintiff's) paper, to persons other than the defendants, the fixtures having been obtained by defendants from the original purchasers of the patented combination, and also of selling oval rolls of paper of defendants' own manufacture to persons who had previously purchased fixtures and paper from the plaintiff, with the knowledge and intention that the paper so sold was to be used in connection ..... 357,993 are practically the same, and are for a combination of the paper roll described in the former patent, with a mechanism for the delivery of the paper to the user in an economical manner. ..... no question is made but that the mechanism of these patents by which the paper is served out to the user involves a patentable novelty, but it is claimed first that, the roll of paper being perishable, and the machine being constructed for page 152 u. s. ..... while neither of these devices is a precise anticipation of the hicks patent in the manner in which they are used, it is impossible to say that a mere enlargement of these devices to the size contemplated by hicks would constitute invention, although by such enlargement the roll became capable of being used in a somewhat different manner. .....

McclaIn Vs. Ortmayer

Court : US Supreme Court

..... of september 2, 1882, to which reference has already been made, that in endeavoring to practice the invention in his prior patent, he found that the two-roll spring was not generally applicable to collars of different sizes, as it had been supposed it would be, as the rolls in collars of different sizes and of different makes varied so much that while it would make a pad applicable to collars of different sizes for light work, the same pad could not be used on collars for ..... this was evidently the theory of the patentee himself, since, a little more than two months after this patent was issued, in a letter to the patent office of september 2, 1882, in which he made application for his second patent, covering the single-roll spring, he stated that "the single-roll spring must be conceded to be a structure positively and unequivocally different from the two-roll spring. ..... while this enables the pad to be located on the collar more readily than when two springs were used, the roll performs the same function as in the prior patent, and the patent can only be sustained upon the theory that the discarding of the after roll involved invention. ..... 267,011 was for an improvement upon the prior patent, and consisted in discarding that portion of the spring of such patent as embraced the after roll of a collar, and in using the fore roll only. .....

Torrent Arms Lumber Co. Vs. Rodgers

Court : US Supreme Court

..... not in the reissue: "be it known that i, esau torrent, of muskegon, in the county of muskegon and state of michigan, have invented a" image:b "new and improved machine for turning [rolling saw] logs, and i do hereby declare that the following is a full, clear, and exact description thereof, which will enable others skilled in the art to which it appertains to make and ..... rodgers, to maintain the issue on his part, introduced in evidence the original letters patent, dated august 25, 1868, granted to esau torrent for image:a "a new and improved machine for rolling saw logs," the assignment of said letters patent by the patentee to rodgers, and the reissued letters patent granted to rodgers as the assignee of torrent, applied for june 25, 1873, and issued ..... , the defendant in error, against the torrent and arms lumber company, the plaintiff in error, to recover damages for the infringement of reissued letters patent for "a new and improved machine for rolling saw logs," dated june 25, 1873, granted to rodgers as the assignee of esau torrent, the original patentee. ..... the device, as described in the reissued patent, is adapted not only to turn logs on their axes, but to roll them from one place to another, as from one part of the log ..... patent, the invention was declared to be an improved device for turning or rolling ..... patent, a wedge shaped tooth bar is shown hinged at its lower end to an upright shaft, in order that it might adjust itself in proper position to take hold of a log and roll .....

Corning Vs. Burden

Court : US Supreme Court

..... avers that henry burden was "the first inventor of a new and useful machine for rolling puddle balls," for which a patent was granted to him in 1840, and that the defendants, corning and winslow, "made ..... the plaintiff, and the principle of its operation was not new, and that the common and well known machines called nobbling rolls, which were in use long before the application of burden for a patent, embraced the same invention and improvements used for substantially the same purpose. ..... to support the issue in his behalf, the plaintiff gave in evidence a patent to henry burden, dated 10 december, 1840, for "a new and useful machine for rolling puddlers' balls and other masses of iron in the manufacture of iron," and followed it by testimony tending to show the novelty and utility of ..... henry burden, brought his action against corning and winslow for a violation of a patent granted to henry as the original and first inventor and discoverer of a new and useful machine for rolling puddle balls or other masses of iron in the manufacture of iron. ..... other matters to be given in evidence affecting the novelty of plaintiff's machine, the notice denies that the machine used by the defendant was an infringement of that patented by plaintiff, and avers that the machine used by them was described in a patent issued to the defendant, winslow, in december, 1847, "for rolling and compressing puddlers' balls," differing in principle and mode of operation from that described in the plaintiff's patent. .....

Aro Mfg. Co., Inc. Vs. Convertible Top Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... a single element of a combination, with intent that it shall be united to the other elements, and so complete the combination, is an infringement," the court found the situation before it distinguishable in that "the element [paper roll] made by the alleged infringer is an article of manufacture perishable in its nature, which it is the object of the mechanism [the dispenser] to deliver, and which must be renewed periodically, whenever the device is put to use ..... 364 the inventive concept, [ footnote 3/3 ] the cost of the component relative to the cost of the combination, [ footnote 3/4 ] the common sense understanding and intention of the patent owner and the buyer of the combination as to its perishable components, [ footnote 3/5 ] whether the purchased component replaces a worn-out part or is brought for some other purpose, [ footnote 3/6 ] and other ..... although there was no statutory provision defining infringement prior to 1952, the definition adopted is consonant with the longstanding statutory prescription of the terms of the patent grant, which was contained in 4884 of the revised statutes as follows: "every patent shall contain a short title or description of the invention or discovery, correctly indicating its nature and design, and a grant to the patentee . ..... envelope, supra, the court found no contributory infringement on the part of one supplying toilet paper rolls specially designed for use in a patented combination, comprising a dispenser and the paper rolls themselves. .....

Dawson Chem. Co. Vs. Rohm and Haas Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... the court deemed immaterial the fact that "the unpatented refrigerant is one of the necessary elements of the patented product," for the patent holder had "no right to be free from competition in the sale of solid carbon dioxide" (dry ice) and "this limitation, inherent in the patent grant, is not dependent upon the peculiar function or character of the unpatented material or on the way in which it is ..... doctrine of contributory infringement where it was most needed, rich argued, it was essential to restrict pro tanto the judicially created doctrine of patent misuse: "i would like to recall that we are dealing with a problem which involves a conflict between two doctrines, contributory infringement and misuse ..... previous attempts to construe this statute have been guided by the principle that "we should not expand patent rights by overruling or modifying our prior cases construing the patent statutes, unless the argument for expansion of privilege is based on more than mere inference from ambiguous ..... the memorandum explained the rationale behind contributory infringement, and it gave as one example of its proper application the protection of a patent for use of a chemical: "[o]ne who supplies a hitherto unused chemical to the public for use in a new method is stealing the benefit of the discovery of the property of this chemical which made the ..... a suit by a manufacturer of a patented device for dispensing toilet paper against a supplier of paper rolls that fit the patented invention. .....

Cold Metal Process Co. Vs. United Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... cold metal asked (1) for an injunction restraining united from prosecuting certain suits, pending in ohio and elsewhere, founded upon united's claim of exclusive rights under the patent, and (2) for determination of the amount to be paid by united under the 1927 contract. ..... 447 in 1927, petitioner, the cold metal process company, an ohio corporation, and united engineering & foundry company, a pennsylvania corporation, entered into a contract for the purpose of securing a patent in the name of cold metal relating to a certain type of steel rolling mill and of granting to united an exclusive license to make, use, and sell mills under such patent. ..... to that end, the parties contributed claims under their respective patent applications, and it was agreed that the license should be granted when the patent was issued. ..... [ footnote 3 ] in 1930, the patent was issued, but cold metal refused to treat the 1927 contract as conferring an exclusive license on united. ..... the licensed mills, fixed the compensation payable under the 1927 contract, and found that united's license had existed from 1930 to 1947, and that united's customers were duly licensed to use the patented mills. ..... in 1939, cold metal, in line with the foregoing results, filed a supplemental complaint asking that the 1927 contract be "cancelled, revoked and annulled," and that united be enjoined from further operations under the patent. .....

Moffitt Vs. Rogers

Court : US Supreme Court

..... the revolving or turning counter-former a, in combination with a supporting roll or rolls for rolling or for rolling and flanging blank stock into heel stiffeners, substantially as shown and described. ..... " it therefore appears that the specification and first claim of the original patent was intended to cover an elongated heel-shaped former, eccentrically set upon its shaft, against which the material of which the counter was to be made was pressed by a revolving roller or rollers, and that the first claim of the reissued patent was expanded so that it might cover a "former" circular in cross-section, concentrically set, and revolving in the semicircular groove of a ..... " in the first claim of the reissued patent, the device of one or three rolls is expanded to cover "any mechanism for holding and shaping the blank over" the ..... a treadle strap, whereby the swing-frame may be pulled down to give any required degree of pressure, and which also permits the eccentric former to rise and fall, as in its movements it rides and rolls over the surface of the counter, the counterpiece being placed centrally upon the 'former' and being rubbed and rolled as well as squeezed between them while being brought into shape. ..... previously, however, to the date of the complainant's original letters patent, ready-made molded counters were manufactured by placing the counterblank across the opening of the mold and forcing it into the mold by a plunger or former, or by placing the blank upon the back of the .....