Celluloid Manuf'g Co. v. American Zylonite Co.

35 F. 301, 1888 U.S. App. LEXIS 2459
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided April 18, 1888·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Wallace, J.

Stevens was the first to discover the value of fusel oil as a solvent of camphor in conjunction with nitro-cellulose. It was known previously that fusel oil was a solvent of camphor, and that various essential oils could be used in conjunction with camphor in the manufacture of pyroxyline; but some of these oils were not efficient, and some ivere useless as substitutes for the menstrua used in producing the conversion of pyroxyline when mixed with camphor. It is doubtless true that by experimenting with the whole list of essential oils any competent chemist could have ascertained that fusel oil would, while acting as a solvent of the camphor, be efficient in producing the proper conversion of pyroxyline, and could have reached the discovery by a process of exclusion. But this is not enough to defeat a patent. By his experiments Stevens obtained a menstruum which gave a better result chan the menstrua previously used, and at less expense. The fact that alcohol had been used for many years as a menstruum, when a cheaper solvent could have been used, and would have been, if the availability of fusel oil as a substitute had been-obvious to those skilled in the art, is inconsistent with the suggestion that nothing- but the mere exercise of judgment was involved in selecting it as a substitute. There should be a decree for the complainant.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Celluloid Manuf'g Co. v. American Zylonite Co., 35 F. 301, 1888 U.S. App. LEXIS 2459 (circtsdny 1888).

35 F. 301 (Celluloid Manuf'g Co. v. American Zylonite Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Mitchel
102 F.2d 868 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1939)
Mathieson Alkali Works, Inc. v. Coe
99 F.2d 443 (D.C. Circuit, 1938)
In re Sibley
88 F.2d 960 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1937)
King v. Anderson
90 F. 500 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1898)