Consolidated Rubber Tire Co. v. B. F. Goodrich Co.

Citations

• 195 F. 764
• 1912 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1674

Syllabus

<p>1. Patents (§ 202*)—Title—Assignment:</p> <p>An assignment of the right to a patent pending the application and before its issuance vests the title in the assignee, although it is issued in the name of the assignor.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 281-289; Dec. Dig. § 202.*]</p> <p>2. EvinENCE (§ 183*)—Proof of Assignment—Secondary Evidence.</p> <p>Proof that an assignment of a patent was used in evidence in other cases, and that it cannot be found, held sufficient to authorize the introduction of a certified copy of the record thereof in the Patent Office.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Evidence, Cent. Dig. §§ 605-637; Dec. ' Dig. § 183.*]</p> <p>3. Patents (§ 312*)—Suit for Infringement—Title to Support.</p> <p>Where an assignment of the right to a patent, application for which was pending, did not give the number of the application nor otherwise identify the same except by stating the general subject-matter, a subsequent assignment by the inventor executed more than a year after the patent was granted to the same assignee and describing the patent, without proof that no previous assignment had been made to another, is not sufficient to establish the right of the assignee to maintain a suit for infringement.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 543-549; Dec. Dig. § 312.*]</p> <p>4. Patents (§ 312*)—Infringement—Sufficiency of Proof.</p> <p>A bill for infringement of a patent is not sustained by evidence of the sale of any number of the elements of the patented structure less than the whole, where there is no allegation or proof of contributory infringement, nor as to when the sales were made, and especially where the suit is in a district in which neither party resides, so that the matter is jurisdictional.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 543-549; Dec. Dig. § 312.*]</p>