Ethicon, Inc. v. Handgards, Inc.

Ninth Circuit

Ethicon, Inc. v. Handgards, Inc.

432 F.2d 438

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 5, 1971

Docket22985

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 432 F.2d 438 (Ethicon, Inc. v. Handgards, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ethicon, Inc. v. Handgards, Inc., 432 F.2d 438 (9th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Ethicon’s Gerard patent No. 3,028,576 was held invalid because the trial court found that under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) there was prior public use for more than one year of the concept of the machine, the subject of the patent.

There is little or no direct contradiction in the oral evidence. In our view, we have a case that could have been decided either way. Ethicon contends the testimony of Handgards’ principal was too weak and impaired by certain circumstances. But the trial court was entitled to give more weight to other circumstances which point to Handgards’ version being correct.

The decree is affirmed because the findings are not clearly erroneous.

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

PER CURIAM:

Ethicon’s Gerard patent No. 3,028,576 was held invalid because the trial court found that under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) there was prior public use for more than one year of the concept of the machine, the subject of the patent.

There is little or no direct contradiction in the oral evidence. In our view, we have a case that could have been decided either way. Ethicon contends the testimony of Handgards’ principal was too weak and impaired by certain circumstances. But the trial court was entitled to give more weight to other circumstances which point to Handgards’ version being correct.

The decree is affirmed because the findings are not clearly erroneous.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

432 F.2d 438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ethicon-inc-v-handgards-inc-ca9-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack