Sargent v. Vetter

Citations

• 48 App. D.C. 582
• 1919 U.S. App. LEXIS 2359

Syllabus

<p>Patents; Interference; Diligence.</p> <p>1. The application of the rule of diligence depends, more or less, upon the circumstances of each case, the character of the invention, and the skill of the inventor and his ability to develop and commercialize it, being considered; and persistent efforts to exploit an invention will not be discouraged by a too strict application of the rule requiring diligence.</p> <p>2. Where the senior party to an interference involving an improvement in sockets for incandescent electric lamps made drawings in September, 1912, of a device answering the counts of the issue, and from that time until April, 1913, devoted his whole time and energy in devising means to exploit his invention, after which he reduced it to practice and put a device corresponding to the issue on the market during 1913, it was held, that he was not lacking in diligence in reducing the invention to practice, even though it would have cost but a few dollars to have had a device embodying the invention made.</p>