US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

GOSLING V. ROBERTS, 106 U. S. 39 (1882)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 106 U. S. 39 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Gosling v. Roberts, 106 U.S. 39 (1882)

Gosling v. Roberts

Decided October 23, 1882

106 U.S. 39


1. The first claim of reissued letters patent No. b644, granted to John W. Gosling Nov. 4, 1873, for an "improvement in step covers and wheel fenders for carriages," if construed to be broad enough to cover the structure made in accordance with the specification annexed to letters patent No. 90,584, granted to John Roberts May 25, 1869, is void because the invention is not new, nor is it embraced in the original letters.

2. The invention covered by the claim of Gosling's original letters (post, p. 106 U. S. 42) was new, and they are adequate to secure it.

This was a bill filed by Gosling wherein he alleges that, being the first inventor of a new and useful improvement in step covers and wheel fenders for carriages, he obtained chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 106 U. S. 40

letters patent therefor, No. 62,406, bearing date Feb. 26, 1867; that on his surrendering them, reissued letters No. 5,644, dated Nov. 4, 1873, were granted to him for that invention, and that Roberts, the defendant, was infringing them. He prays for an injunction, an account, and general relief.

Roberts denies as well the alleged infringement, the novelty, and utility of the improvement described in the reissued letters, as Gosling's claim to be the first inventor thereof. He also sets up as a defense that they are void because they include matters not covered by the original letters.

The court, upon a final hearing, dismissed the bill, and Gosling appealed.

The specifications and claims which are set forth in the opinion of the court refer to certain drawings. Those annexed to Gosling's original letters are as follows:



Page 106 U. S. 41

The drawings annexed to his reissued letters are as follows:


ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™