Reissued Patents: Comments on the Decision of the U. S. Supreme Court in the Case of Miller Vs. The Bridgeport Brass Co., Practical Effects of the Decision, and Its Warning to Inventors |
Other editions - View all
Reissued Patents: Comments on the Decision of the U. S. Supreme Court in the ... Henry Howson No preview available - 2016 |
Common terms and phrases
actual mistake appears applications for patents arts attorney authorize a reissue Bridgeport Brass Company carbon chamber chimney client collar Commissioner copy Court of Chancery deceptive intention decision deflector described domes duty EDWARD MILLER enlarge the claim entitled error of judgment evils Examiner expanded Reissues expansion of claims flame fraudulent or deceptive fraudulent reissues grant heater G HOWSON improvement incompetent invention issue laches or delay lamp Letters Patent Librarian of Congress lower end machine manufacturers ment October 16 original patent outer side patent is allowed Patent Office patent property patent system patentee's patents by Reissue perforated cap perforated sheet perhaps plan or top prior patents proper raise or lower Reissue applications REISSUE OF PATENTS reissued patent rod ƒ rule slot soliciting patents specification speculator spurs g suggested Supreme Court tence things tion top view tube F tube or passage upper end wick adjuster
Popular passages
Page 10 - Whenever any patent is inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective or insufficient specification, or by reason of the patentee claiming as his own invention or discovery more than he had a right to claim as new, if the error has arisen by inadvertence, accident, or mistake, and without any fraudulent or deceptive intention, the Commissioner shall, on the surrender of such patent and the payment of the duty required by law, cause a new patent for the same invention, and in accordance with the...
Page 102 - This provision of the Act of 1836 was in turn superseded by § 53 of the Act of July 8th, 1870, c. 230, 16 Stat. 205, which provided, " that whenever any patent is inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective or insufficient specification, or by reason of the patentee claiming as his own invention or discovery more than he had a right to claim as new...
Page 10 - ... or by reason of the patentee claiming as his invention or discovery more than he had a right to claim as new, the original patent is inoperative or invalid, provided the error has arisen from inadvertence, accident, or mistake, and without any fraudulent or deceptive intention.
Page 87 - ... and I do hereby declare that the following is a full, clear, and exact description of the construction and operation of the same...
Page 100 - But it must be remembered that the claim of a specific device or combination, and an omission to claim other devices or combinations apparent on the face of the patent, ARE IN LAW A DEDICATION TO THE PUBLIC OF THAT WHICH IS NOT CLAIMED. "It is a declaration that that which is not claimed is either not the patentee's invention, or, if his, he dedicates it to the public.
Page 103 - ... shall particularly specify and point out the part, improvement, or combination, which he claims as his own invention or discovery.
Page 105 - Now whilst, as before stated, we do not deny that a claim may be enlarged in a re-issued patent, we are of opinion that this can only be done when an actual mistake has occurred ; not from a mere error of judgment, for that may be rectified by appeal, but a real, bona fide mistake, inadvertently committed; such as a court of chancery, in cases within its ordinary jurisdiction, would correct.
Page 15 - If two years public enjoyment of an invention with the consent and allowance of the inventor, is evidence of abandonment, and a bar to an application for a patent, a public disclaimer in the patent itself should be construed equally favorable to the public. Nothing but a clear mistake or inadvertence Opinion of the court. and a speedy application for its correction, is admissible when it is sought merely to enlarge the claim.
Page 102 - SEC. 27-A. Whenever any patent is wholly or partly, inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective or insufficient specification, or by reason of the patentee claiming as his own invention more than he had a right to claim as new...
Page 99 - But there is another grave objection to the validity of the reissued patent in this case. It is manifest on the face of the patent, when compared with the original, that the suggestion of inadvertence and mistake in the specification was a mere...