Knapp v. Morss

Citations

• 150 U.S. 221
• 14 S. Ct. 81
• 37 L. Ed. 1059
• 1893 U.S. LEXIS 2376

Syllabus

<p>The second claim in letters patent No. 233,240, for improvements in dress forms, issued October 12, 1880, to John Hall, and by him assigned to Charles A. Morss,viz.: “ 2. In combination with the standard a and ribs c, the double braces e2, the sliding blocks J'1 and /2, and rests hl and 7i2, substantially as and for the purposes set forth,” when read and interpreted with reference to other and broader claims which were made by the patentee and were rejected by the Patent Office, must either be held to be invalid for want of invention, or must be so limited in view of that action by the Patent.Office, and in view of the prior state of the art, as not to be infringed by a combination leaving out one of the elements of the patentee’s device.</p> <p>A claim in letters patent cannot be so construed as 'to cover what was rejected by the Patent Office on the application for the patent.</p> <p>The combination of old elements which perform no new function, and accomplish no new results, does not involve patentable novelty.</p> <p>The end or purpose sought to be accomplished by a device is not the subject of a patent, but only the new and useful means for obtaining that end.</p>