Edison v. Allis Chalmers Co.
Citations
- 191 F. 837
- 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 5540
Syllabus
<p>1. Patents (§ 288*) — Suit fob Tnebinc.ioient — Jurisdiction of Defendants.</p> <p>Where one of two nonresident defendants, each of whom had an established place of business in the district of suit, had, prior to such suit, constructed an infringing machine for the other, and assisted the latter in installing the same for use .by a third defendant within the district, there was such a completed act of infringement, or threatened infringement, by each defendant within the district, as to give the court jurisdiction.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 460-466; Dee. Dig. § 288.*</p> <p>Jurisdiction of federal courts in suits relating to patents, see note to . Bailey v. Mosher, 11 C. C. A. 313.]</p> <p>2. ) ¡ ííatjctííts ! (§ 311*) — Suit for Infringement — Issues.</p> <p>'Complainant in an infringement suit is not entitled to prove and recover for an entirely separate and distinct act of infringement committed ' •' in another district since commencement of the suit by one of a number •^ of defendants sued jointly.</p> <p>i . i ■ i [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 541, 542; Dec. , .Dig. § 311.*]</p> <p>3. Patents (§ 328*) — Validity and Infringement — Rock Crusher.</p> <p>The Edison patents, Nos. 672,616 and 672,617, for a method and apparatus for breaking rock by kinetic energy by means .of two massive iron '1' Toils having irregular surfaces and slipping power connection, by which .■ they are independently rotated toward each other until they acquire a . ;: high momentum, the charges of rock being delivered at intervals and ,.. sledged, broken, and crushed by the knobs on the surfaces of the rolls, were not anticipated and disclose invention of high order and merit. Such patents also held valid against the claim of prior public use, and ! the method patent and claims 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 of the apparatus patent . infringed. Claims 5 and 6- held not infringed.</p> <p>4. Patents (§ 75*) — Prior Public Use — What Const
Judges: Hazel
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.