1
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Dec-05-1938
Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-Enamel Corp. - 305 U.S. 315 (1938) U.S. Supreme Court Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-Enamel Corp., 305 U.S. 315 (1938) Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-Enamel Corp. No. 51 Argued November 7, 8, 1938 Decided December 5, 1938 305 U.S. 315 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT Syllabus 1. A registrant under the Trade Mark Act of March 19, 1920, of the name Nu-Enamel, for enamels and kindred products, brought suit in the federal district court to enjoin infringement by a competitor who was using in the sale of enamels the name Nu-Beauty Enamel. The bill alleged, inter alia, that, in the trade, the name Nu-Enamel had come to mean the plaintiff and its products exclusively; that the mark distinguished plaintiff's goods from others of the same class, and that Nu-Beauty Enamel was being passed off by merchants as the product of the plaintiff. Held: (1) It being conceded by the answer that the name Nu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Mar-28-1938
United States v. O'Donnell - 303 U.S. 501 (1938) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. O'Donnell, 303 U.S. 501 (1938) United States v. O'Donnell No. 487 Argued March 1, 2, 1938 Decided March 28, 1938 303 U.S. 501 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus In a suit to quiet its title to a part of Mare Island in San Francisco Bay, within the territory acquired from Mexico by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the United States claimed under a deed to it in 1853 by Bissell and Aspinwall, who derived their title through a grant in 1841 by Alvarado, Mexican Governor of California, to Castro. Respondents claimed under a patent issued by California to Darlington in 1857, purporting to convey the land in question as a part of the swamp or overflowed lands granted to the State Page 303 U. S. 502 by the Swamp Lands Act of 1850. The Board of Land Commissioners, created by the Mexican Claims Act of 1851, had confirmed the title of Bissell and Aspin all in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Apr-25-1938
United States v. Klamath & Moadoc Tribes of Indians - 304 U.S. 119 (1938) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Klamath & Moadoc Tribes of Indians, 304 U.S. 119 (1938) United States v. Klamath & Moadoc Tribes of Indians No. 707 Argued April 1, 4, 1938 Decided April 25, 1938 304 U.S. 119 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus 1. In a treaty by which the Klamath and other tribes of Indians ceded land which they had held in immemorial possession, part was retained, "until otherwise directed by the President," to be set apart as a residence for the Indians and "held and regarded as an Indian reservation." Part of the reserved land was subsequently appropriated by the United States. Held: (1) That the words quoted did not detract from the tribes' right of occupancy. P. 304 U. S. 122 . (2) In ascertaining just compensation for the land appropriated, the value of the standing timber should be included. Id. (3) While the United States has power to control and manage the affai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Nov-14-1938
Kellogg Co. v. National Biscuit Co. - 305 U.S. 111 (1938) U.S. Supreme Court Kellogg Co. v. National Biscuit Co., 305 U.S. 111 (1938) Kellogg Company v. National Biscuit Company Nos. 2 and 56 Argued October 10, 1938 Decided November 14, 1938 305 U.S. 111 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus 1. The term "shredded wheat" is generic, and no exclusive right to its use may be acquired. P. 305 U. S. 116 . 2. Moreover, "shredded wheat" was the general designation of the product made under the product and process patents issued to Perky, upon the expiration whereof there passed to the public not only the right to make the article as it was made during the patent period, but also the right to apply thereto the name by which it had become known. P. 305 U. S. 117 . 3. To establish, by application of the doctrine of secondary meaning, the exclusive right to "shredded wheat" as a tradename, the claimant must show that the primary significance o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Nov-21-1938
General Talking Pictures Corp. v. Western Elec. Co. - 305 U.S. 124 (1938) U.S. Supreme Court General Talking Pictures Corp. v. Western Elec. Co., 305 U.S. 124 (1938) General Talking Pictures Corporation v. Western Electric Co. No. 1 Reargued October 19, 20, 1938 Decided November 21, 1938 305 U.S. 124 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus 1. The owner of a patent may lawfully restrict his licensee to manufacture and sale of the patented invention for use in only one or some of several distinct fields in which it is useful, excluding him from the others. P. 305 U. S. 125 . 2. Where a licensee, so restricted, makes and sells the patented article for a use outside the scope of his license, he is an infringer, and his vendee, buying with knowledge of the facts, is likewise an infringer. P. 305 U. S. 127 . 3. In this case, the Court has no occasion to consider (a) what the rights of the parties would have been if the articles embodying t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-31-1938
United States v. Esnault-Pelterie - 303 U.S. 26 (1938) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Esnault-Pelterie, 303 U.S. 26 (1938) United States v. Esnault-Pelterie No. 231 Argued January 7, 1938 Decided January 31, 1938 303 U.S. 26 CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus 1. Review by this Court of a judgment of the Court of Claims against the United States in a suit for infringement of a patent, brought under the Act of June 25, 1910, as amended, is limited to questions of law. P. 303 U. S. 28 . 2. In a patent case in the Court of Claims under the Act of 1910, the questions of validity and infringement are questions of fact. P. 303 U. S. 29 . 3. The duty of the Court of Claims to find the ultimate facts, requires that it resolve conflicting inferences and draw the necessary factual conclusions from the evidence. Id. 4. The Court of Claims made elaborate circumstantial findings preceding its two ultimate findings that the patent sued on was valid and infringed by the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : May-16-1938
General Elec. Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp. - 304 U.S. 364 (1938) U.S. Supreme Court General Elec. Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp., 304 U.S. 364 (1938) General Elec. Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp. No. 453 Argued March 4, 7, 1938 Decided May 16, 1938 304 U.S. 364 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus 1. Product claims 25-27, of Patent No. 1,410,499, to Pacz, for a filament for electric incandescent lamps or other devices, composed substantially of tungsten and made up mainly of a number of comparatively large grains of such size and contour as to prevent substantial sagging and offsetting during a normal or commercially useful life for such a lamp or other device, held void for want of a sufficiently definite disclosure. R.S. 4888; 35 U.S.C. 33. P. 304 U. S. 368 . 2. Claimed inventions, improvements, and discoveries, turning on points so refined as the granular structure of products, require precise descriptions of the new characteris...
Tag this Judgment!