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

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
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 : www.chanroblesbar.com 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 www.chanrobles.com


HUBER V. NELSON MANUFACTURING CO., 148 U. S. 270 (1893)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 148 U. S. 270 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Huber v. Nelson Manufacturing Co., 148 U.S. 270 (1893)

Huber v. Nelson Manufacturing Company

No. 143

Argued March 16-17, 1893

Decided March 27, 1893

148 U.S. 270

Syllabus

Letters patent No. 260,232, granted June 27, 1882, to Henry Huber, as assignee of Stewart Peters and William Donald, of Glasgow, Scotland, for an "improvement in water closets," the patent expressing on its face that it was "subject to the limitation prescribed by § 4887, Rev.Stat., by reason of English patent dated April 7, 1874, No. 1207," are void because the English patent had expired April 7, 1881.

Reissued letters patent No. 10,86, granted to James E. Boyle, April 19, 1887, for an improvement in flushing apparatus for water closets, on the reissue of original patent No. 291,139, granted to Boyle January 1, 1884, the application for the reissue having been filed January 2, 1885, are void, as to claims 1 and 2 of the reissue. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 148 U. S. 271

Every claim of the original patent contained as an element a flushing chamber, and no claim of the reissue which leaves out a flushing chamber can be construed as valid.

There is new matter in the reissue specification inserted to lay a foundation for the expanded claims in the reissue.

There is nothing in the original patent which suggests the possibility that Boyle's invention could be operated by a combination which omitted the flushing chamber as an element thereof.

In equity to prevent the infringement of letters patent and for damages for such infringement. Decree dismissing the bill, from which the plaintiffs appealed. The case is stated in the opinion.





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED