Paulus v. M. M. Buck Mfg. Co.

Citations

• 129 F. 594
• 64 C.C.A. 162
• 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4080

Syllabus

<p>1. Patent fob Invention — Owneb of Undivided Interest May Grant License.</p> <p>The owner of an undivided part of all the rights secured by a patent may, without the consent of his co-owners, grant a valid license to use the monopoly secured by the patent.</p> <p>2. Same — Assignment—License—Definition.</p> <p>A patent secures the exclusive right to make, the exclusive right to use, and the exclusive right to vend the invention it protects. A grant of all these exclusive rights throughout the United States, a grant of an undivided part of all these exclusive rights, or a grant of all these exclusive rights throughout a specified part of the United States, is an assignment of an interest in the patent, by whatever name it is designated. A grant of any interest in or right under a patent less than these is a license.</p> <p>3. Same — Unrecorded Gbant of Exclusive Rights — Validity.</p> <p>An unrecorded parol or written grant of all the exclusive rights under a patent is an assignment, and under section 4898, Rev. St. [U. S. Comp.</p> <p>St. 1901, p. 3387], it is void as against subsequent purchasers for value, without notice.</p> <p>4. Appeal — Findings and Decree — Presumptions.</p> <p>Where a chancellor has considered conflicting evidence, and made his findings and decree thereon, they must be deemed to be presumptively correct in an appellate court; and, unless an obvious error has intervened in the application of the law, or some serious mistake has been made in the consideration of the evidence, they will not be disturbed.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p> <p>f 1. See Patents, vol. 38, Cent. Dig. § 269.</p> <p>1T 2. Power ,of patentee to control his invention, see note to Heaton-Peninsular B. F. Co. v. Eureka Specialty Co., 25 C. C. A. 280.</p>