Hutton v. Star Slide Seat Co.

60 F. 747, 1894 U.S. App. LEXIS 2752
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern Ohio
DecidedMarch 28, 1894
DocketNo. 4,619
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 60 F. 747 (Hutton v. Star Slide Seat Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hutton v. Star Slide Seat Co., 60 F. 747, 1894 U.S. App. LEXIS 2752 (circtsdoh 1894).

Opinion

SAGE, District Judge

(orally). The defendant demurs specially to the bill that it does not set forth that the invention described in the patent sued upon has not been previously patented or described in any printed publication. The bill states that the invention was not known or used by others before complainant’s invention or discovery thereof, and was not in use or on sale in this country for more than two years before his application for letters patent therefor. That this averment Is good against a general demurrer was held in [748]*748McCoy v. Nelson, 121 U. S. 484, 7 Sup. Ct. 1000. In Coop v. Institute, 47 Fed. 899, it was held that the omission of the averment in regard to the invention having been patented or discovered in a printed publication was a defect in form which could be taken advantage of by special demurrer, and should be remedied by amendment. To the same effect see Consolidated Brake-Shoe Co. v. Detroit Steel & Spring Co., Id. 894; Overman Wheel Co. v. Elliott Hickory Cycle Co., 49 Fed. 859; and Hanlon v. Primrose, 56 Fed. 600. The demurrer will be sustained at the cost of complainant, with leave to present an amendment within 20 days with an application for leave to file.

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

Related

Moeller v. Scranton Glass Instrument Co.
14 F.2d 120 (M.D. Pennsylvania, 1926)
Bayley & Sons, Inc. v. Braunstein Bros.
237 F. 671 (S.D. New York, 1916)
Maxwell Steel Vault Co. v. National Casket Co.
205 F. 515 (N.D. New York, 1913)
American Graphophone Co. v. National Phonograph Co.
127 F. 349 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1904)
Elliott & Hatch Book-Typewriter Co. v. Fisher Typewriter Co.
109 F. 330 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1901)
Diamond Match Co. v. Ohio Match Co.
80 F. 117 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 F. 747, 1894 U.S. App. LEXIS 2752, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hutton-v-star-slide-seat-co-circtsdoh-1894.