Hill v. Wooster
Citations
- 132 U.S. 693
- 10 S. Ct. 228
- 33 L. Ed. 502
- 1890 U.S. LEXIS 1885
Syllabus
<p>In a suit in equity, brought under §.4915 of the Revised Statutes, in a Circuit Court of the United States; there was a decree in favor of the plaintiff, that he was entitled to receive a patent for certain claims. The decision rested solely on the fact that he was the prior inventor, as between him and the defendant. On appeal by the defendant to this court; Held, that this court must consider the question of the patentability of the inventions covered by the claims, and that, as they were not patentable, the decree must be reversed, and the bill be dismissed.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “The opinion of the circuit court discusses ... and states that considerable evidence was produced before the court which was not before the patent-office.”
- \The opinion of the circuit court discusses ... and states that considerable evidence was produced before the court which was not before the patent-office.\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Blatchford
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
92 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Sanford v. KepnerSupreme Court· 1952-11-10· cited 212×
- Smithkline Beecham Corp. v. Apotex Corp.Federal Circuit· 2005-04-08· cited 127×
- Burt v. EvorySupreme Court· 1890-02-03· cited 95×
- Lovell Manufacturing Co. v. CarySupreme Court· 1893-03-06· cited 89×
- Hoover Co. v. CoeSupreme Court· 1945-05-07· cited 74×
- Christie v. SeyboldSixth Circuit· 1893-03-22· cited 62×
- Fond Du Lac County v. MaySupreme Court· 1890-12-15· cited 34×
- Knutson v. GallsworthyD.C. Circuit· 1947-09-15· cited 32×
- Western Willite Co. v. Trinidad Asphalt Mfg. Co.Eighth Circuit· 1926-12-08· cited 32×
- Standard Oil Company v. MontedisonD. Delaware· 1980-02-28· cited 26×
- Frederick F. Glass v. William C. De RooCustoms and Patent Appeals· 1956-11-30· cited 22×
- Shell Development Co. v. Pure Oil Co.District of Columbia· 1953-03-04· cited 21×
- Smithkline Beecham Corporation and Beecham Group, P.L.C. v. Apotex Corp., Apotex, Inc., and Torpharm, Inc., Defendants-CrossFederal Circuit· 2004-04-23· cited 20×
- McNamara v. PowellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1939-03-15· cited 20×
- Durham v. SeymourSupreme Court· 1896-03-02· cited 18×
- Tomlinson of High Point v. CoeD.C. Circuit· 1941-10-27· cited 17×
- Standard Oil Co. v. Montedison, S.p.A.Third Circuit· 1981-10-14· cited 17×
- Sanford v. KepnerThird Circuit· 1952-03-24· cited 16×
- Premier MacHine Co. v. FreemanFirst Circuit· 1936-06-03· cited 16×
- Kemper-Thomas Co. v. J. P. Gordon Co.Sixth Circuit· 1933-11-15· cited 15×
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Thompson v. BoisselierSupreme Court· 1885-03-23· cited 150×
- Gardner v. HerzSupreme Court· 1886-05-10· cited 45×
- Stephenson v. Brooklyn Cross-Town RailroadSupreme Court· 1885-03-30· cited 34×
- Brown v. District of ColumbiaSupreme Court· 1889-03-11· cited 26×
- Pomace Holder Co. v. FergusonSupreme Court· 1886-12-06· cited 21×
- Holland v. ShipleySupreme Court· 1888-05-14· cited 9×
- Pattee Plow Co. v. KingmanSupreme Court· 1889-02-04· cited 9×
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.