Perfection Cooler Co. v. Cordley

Citations

• 207 F. 769
• 1913 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1347

Syllabus

<p>Patents (§§ 62, 328*)—Anticipation—Water Cooler.</p> <p>Evidence considered, and heJd insufficient to show anticipation of the Newell patents, No. 895,781 and No. 895,782, for water coolers by an unpatented structure, under the rule that to establish the identity of the two structures, after the lapse of a number of years, something more than oral testimony is required, and in view of the fact that, conceding identity, the evidence that the use of the alleged anticipating structure antedated the Newell invention rested entirely on the recollection of witnesses and was not clear.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—Eor other cases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 78; Dec. Dig. § 62.*]</p>