Court : US Supreme Court
..... office acting on the average application from two to four times. [ footnote 6 ] the progress of adkins' effort to obtain a patent followed the typical pattern. in his initial application, the inventor made the ambitious claim that his entire method of constructing gyroscopes was sufficiently novel to merit protection. the patent office, however, rejected this initial claim, as well as two subsequent amendments, which ..... ). [ footnote 6 ] a. seidel, what the general practitioner should know about patent law and practice 61 (a.l.i.1956). [ footnote 7 ] adkins actually amended his application a third time before he made the amendment which gained the approval of the patent office. this third amendment was superseded by the successful amendment, however, before the patent office considered it. [ footnote 8 ] for purposes of the present lawsuit .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... great value to the manufacturers of steel, and which entitled jones to the reward due to a successful inventor. 2. the phraseology of the patent and the amendments introduced in the patent office are made the subject of much criticism, apparently for the purpose of showing either that jones did not understand what he had invented or ..... crude metal obtained at different times or from different furnaces, the mixing being performed merely by the act of pouring into the charging ladle, and other like means may be employed." and to make the object of the amendment perfectly clear, the prior description of the method was supplemented by stating that the "commingling of ..... ladles or receiving vessels containing crude metal obtained at different times or from different furnaces, the mixing being page 185 u. s. 405 performed merely by the act of pouring into the charging ladle, and other like means may be employed. (the clause in italics was subsequently disclaimed.) i prefer, however, to employ the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... or about the same date, but had not reduced the same to practice by constructing any full-sized devices. on november 26, 1915, linthicum filed an amendment to fowler's application in which all of the claims suggested by the commissioner were inserted. of these claims, linthicum said: "it is thought that these ..... they define an interference to be a proceeding instituted for the purpose of determining the question of priority of invention between two or more parties claiming the same patentable invention (rule 93), and provide that an interference shall be declared between two or more original applications containing conflicting claims (rule 94). before the declaration ..... mere fact that the junior application covers the same ground, or that the junior applicant asserts an interference, is not enough to require the commissioner to act. the judicial remedy for determining priority of invention is by suit in equity between the parties, not by mandamus against the commissioner in an attempt to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... statute, r.s. 4916, amended by act may 24, 1928, which authorizes the alteration of the original invention in a reissued patent, upon surrender of the old patent, for its unexpired term. upon the reissue, "the specifications and claims in every such case shall be subject to revision and restriction in the same manner as original applications are." a patent amended by disclaimer thus speaks from ..... the date of the original patent .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... to recover, in addition to the profits to be accounted for by the defendant, the damages the complainant has sustained thereby. . . ." r.s. 4921, as amended, 42 stat. 392. by the 1946 amendment, act of august 1, 1946, c. 726, 1, 60 stat. 778, 35 u.s.c. (1946 ed.), 67, 70, the statute was changed to approximately ..... statutes." h.r.rep. no. 1923, 82d cong., 2d sess. at 10, 29. [ footnote 21 ] see also hearing before the house committee on patents, 79th cong., 2d sess., on h.r. 5231 (subsequently amended, reintroduced, and reported as h.r. 5311), jan. 29, 1946, e.g., pp. 2-3. [ footnote 22 ] no answer was given by ..... therefore, that, to the majority who joined in mr. justice whittaker's opinion, the asserted distinction was simply irrelevant, since convertible, as the holder of a combination patent, could under no circumstances prevent others from making and supplying unpatented and unpatentable replacement parts for any element of the combination. the court's opinion by mr. justice whittaker .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... 26 be exhibited or sold without limit in such public places. [ footnote 8 ] at a minimum, prurient, patently offensive depiction or description of sexual conduct must have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value to merit first amendment protection. see kois v. wisconsin, supra, at 408 u. s. 230 -232; roth v. united ..... statute could define for regulation under part (b) of the standard announced in this opinion, supra: (a) patently offensive representations or descriptions of ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated. (b) patently offensive representations or descriptions of masturbation, excretory functions, and lewd exhibition of the genitals. sex and nudity may ..... ] see, e.g., oregon laws 1971, c. 743, art. 29, 255-262, and hawaii penal code, tit. 37, 1210-1216, 1972 hawaii session laws, act 9, c. 12, pt.. ii, pp. 126-129, as examples of state laws directed at depiction of defined physical conduct, as opposed to expression. other state formulations .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... which formed the subject of the original patent of which it is a reissue. the express words of the act are 'a new patent for the same invention,' and these words are copied from the act of 1836, which in this respect was substantially the same as the act of 1870. the specification may be amended so as to make it more clear ..... congress, besides what existed before, is found in the new patent act [the act of july 8, 1870, 53], which expressly provides that no new matter shall be introduced into the specification, and in case of a machine patent, that neither the model nor the drawings shall be amended except each by the other." in the case of powder company v. powder ..... osborne is found in 53 of the act of july 8, 1870, in these words: "but no new matter shall be introduced into the specification, nor, in case of a machine patent, shall the model or drawings be amended, except each by the other; but when there is neither model nor drawing, amendments may be made upon proof satisfactory to the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... lifetime in accordance with section 4892 of the revised statutes, and the certificate states that after his death, "the specification originally filed with said application for a patent was amended within the scope of the original oath and the invention described in said original specification, and by way of limitation of the claims, but without the filing ..... more reason for requiring a new oath from his administratrix than there would have been for requiring it from boyle himself. the attorneys who had acted for boyle continued to act under rankin's direction, and although it is not shown that their authority was conferred in writing by a power of attorney executed and filed ..... , the omission of the word "executors" prior to 1836 did not affect the title of the executors, nor did the omission of "administrators and executors" from the act of 1870 make any difference. "the law was not changed by it." taking the sections together, the legislative intent seems to have been that a grant to the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... , even if the latter was applied for and granted after the filing of the american application, but before the american patent issues. but it is confidently asserted that the proceedings in congress relating to the bill which, after numerous amendments, became the act of 1870 show that congress did not contemplate any such change in the law as is involved in the construction ..... 1870 had been interpreted as introducing a new rule in respect of the term of an american patent where the same invention was covered by a foreign patent previously issued. the act of 1875, for the purpose of correcting errors and omissions, amended or repealed nearly seventy sections of the revised statutes. still further, as an examination of the statutes will show, since the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... 17, 1896 (house doc. no. 151, 54th cong., 1st sess.), explaining the situation and recommending that the act of 1891 should be so amended as not to apply to suits brought to recover title to lands certified or patented on account of railroad or other grants. this was referred to the committee on public lands of the house of ..... the limitation of section eight of chapter five hundred and sixty-one of the acts of the second session of the fifty-first congress and amendments thereto [ footnote 1 ] is extended accordingly as to the patents herein referred to. but no patent to any lands held by a bona fide purchaser shall be vacated or annulled, but the right and ..... the consideration or decision of this case. [ footnote 1 ] act of march 3, 1891, c. 561, as amended by act of the same date, c. 559, 26 stat. 1099, 1093. [ footnote 2 ] "be it enacted," etc., "that suits by the united states to vacate and annul any patent to lands heretofore erroneously issued under a special grant shall only be .....
Tag this Judgment!