Skip to main content
· 3/23/1885

Thompson v. Boisselier

Citations

  • 114 U.S. 1
  • 5 S. Ct. 1042
  • 29 L. Ed. 76
  • 1885 U.S. LEXIS 1731

Syllabus

<p>The third claim of reissued letters patent No. 978, granted to William S. Carr, June 12, 1860, for “ improvements in water-closets,”’(the original patent having been granted to him August-5,1856, and,.as reissued, extended July 23,1870, for seven years from August 5, 1870,) namely, “In a valve for’’, water-closets, a cup-leather for controlling the motion of said valve in elos- . ing gradually, substantially as specified; said cup-leather moving freely in one direction, and closing against the containing cylinder in. the other direction', and the leakage of water in said cylinder allowing the movement of said cup-leather, as set forth,’’-construed, and the operation of the device explained.</p> <p>The state of the art, as to prior devices, and the construction and operation of • the defendants’ device, set forth.</p> <p>In view of the state of the art : Held, That, for the purpose of securing the free passage of water in one-direction, and preventing its escape in the other, direction otherwise than gradually, the defendants, had used nothing which they did not have a right to use, and had not appropriated any patentable,, invention which Carr had a right to cover, as against the defendants’ structure,, by the third claim of his reissue.</p> <p>All that Carr did, if anything, was to add his form of orifice to the valve and cup-leather of an existing pump-plunger.</p> <p>The third claim of the Carr reissue involves, as an element in it, the means of leakage set forth.</p> <p>The only point of invention, if it could be dignified by that name, was the special means of leakage shown by Carr, but which the defendants did not usa</p> <p>To be patentable, a thing must not only be new and useful, but must amount to an invention or discovery.</p> <p>Beeent decisions of this court On the subject of what constitutes a patentable invention cited and applied.</p> <p>Under them, claim three of the Carr reissue must, in view of the state of the art, either be held not to involv

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • court of private land claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Blatchford

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.