Skip to main content
· 8/4/1913

H. J. Heinz Co. v. Cohn

Citations

  • 207 F. 547
  • 125 C.C.A. 197
  • 1913 U.S. App. LEXIS 1651

Syllabus

<p>1. Patents (§ 157*)—Anticipation—Original and Divisional Patents.</p> <p>A patent granted on a divisional application relates back to the date of tile original application, and the patent granted on the latter is not in the prior art and cannot anticipate the other.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 229-232; Dec. Dig. § 157.*]</p> <p>2. Patents (| 312*)—Validity—Presumption and Burden of Proof.</p> <p>A patent is presumptive evidence of prior invention and novelty and when produced makes for the patentee or his assignee a prima facie case which can only be overcome by proof of lack of novelty or of prior invention by another beyond a reasonable doubt.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 544-549; Dec. Dig. § 312.*]</p> <p>3. Patents (§ 41*)—Combination Patents—Novelty—“Patentable Novelty.”</p> <p>A combination of old elements, > which performs no new function and accomplishes no new results, does not involve patentable novelty.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. § 48; Dec. Dig. § 41.*</p> <p>For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, vol. 6, p. 5234.]</p> <p>4. Patents (§ 25*)—“Invention”—Aggregation.</p> <p>The mere aggregate of several results, each the complete product of one of the combined elements, does not involve invention.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 27-29; Dec. Dig. § 25.*</p> <p>For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, vol. 4, pp. 3749-3754.]</p> <p>5. Patents (| 27*)—“Invention”—Extension of Use of Old Combination.</p> <p>The extension of the use of an old combination of elements is not invention where no new result is produced and no new method is found for producing the old result.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 31, 32; Dee. Dig. § 27.*]</p> <p>6. Patents (§ 41*)—Novelty—New Combination of Old Elements—“Patentable Novelty.”</p> <p>In a new combination of old elements, whereby through their new relation

Judges: Wolverton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced 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.