Slaughter v. Halle

Citations

• 21 App. D.C. 19
• 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 5488

Syllabus

<p>Patents; Patentability; Priority of Invention; Presumptive Evidence.</p> <p>1. This court cannot entertain a contention by the unsuccessful party to an interference that if the claims in controversy are to receive a broad construction such as the Commissioner gave them, affirming the primary examiner in that regard, and reversing the examiners-in-chief, who gave them a narrow construction (intimating that otherwise they would not be patentable) — then they are unpatentable.</p> <p>2. In an interference case involving a card-writing attachment in type-writing machines, the circumstance that the junior applicant failed to disclose his invention to his employer, a type-writer company, which was in pursuit of some such device, although it would have been to his interest so to do, and did nothing to give effect to what was in his mind until he went into the employ of another company and was then stimulated into activity by what he had seen done by the senior party, who was the president of the former company,— is strong evidence that he did not have the invention during his first employment.</p>