The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 256: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States, May-July, 1919. Page: 31
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
WEBER ELECTIC' CO. V. CUTLER-HAMMER MFG. CO.
so .near to existing, articles of commerce that the; only field open' ti
him was 'ihp.,ted, t, , particular rode of making, or by specifically
stated chemical tests.
The chemical tests or limits indicated in Iurphenal's disclosure are
put with an "about';;,they-are not.carried into dte claims sued on, as
they ateninto some-not in suit; nor do all, the usable and marketable
specimens of defendant's factory show uniformnn tests. We adhere to
the yGmaiks ,pncerning "iodine .values, titer, and melting points" here-
tofore made, but do' not arid 'did not ground judgment thereon.
Our deci*n) is ,nd has been based on a firm conviction that what
is practic ally, ard, consisting solely of one vegetable oil in a state of
arrested hydriogefition, is a new thing in the sense of the patent law,
almost as new as a synthetic egg, evolved from vegetable albumen' by
The' results of such evolutionary treatment are by their genesis so
novel that analysis of constituents is immaterial. Patentable novelty
is not in their,parts, as revealed by quantitative or qualitative analysis,
but in a prvtigcal functional identity between animal products and a
vegetable product as chemically changed.
Our view of, the nature of this invention permitted us to assume
(riot find) a possibly quite superior method as used by defendants; but,
when the product was seen to be something that was (in effect) lard
resulting frofit an arrested hydrogenation of cotton seed oil, there was
On this record, it may almost be said that defendants' machines will
cease to produce infringements only when they yield what a plain
man would not call lard.
ROGERS; Cibcuit Judge, concurs.
WARD, Circuit Judge, not voting.
WEBER! ELECTRIC CO. v. CUTLER-HAMMER MFG. CO.
(Circuit-Court of Appear;s, Second Circuit. January 22, 1919.)
S" No. 187.
1. PATENTS <=327-ATIos--JUDGMENT-EFFECT.
While it,Pi true that each succeeding- defendant encountered by the
owner Of a patent is not estopved by previb6s litigation from advancing
d'eenses 'often' overruled, defenses contrary to fundamental findings long
'adhered to do hot merit discussion.
2. PAtNT <eBl(2)ca--InFRTNG]uENT--Es+oPPEr..
In a suitfor:infringement..of the Weber patents,,No. 743,206 and No.
916,)12,.~ aelating.to,s rockets for electric lamps, hely that plainutff was' not
stopped fro'asserting infringement, on the ground that one in whose
patent' defe iidht had an interest was the commercial pioneer, and was
allowed to build up a large trade in such fixtures without objection.
G=For other'i8tlde see same topic"& KEY-NDMBER in all Key-Numbered Digeste & Indexes
Here’s what’s next.
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 256: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States, May-July, 1919., legislative document, 1919; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38827/m1/45/: accessed July 27, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.