Hygienic Fleeced Underwear Co. v. Phœnix Knitting Works

Third Circuit

Hygienic Fleeced Underwear Co. v. Phœnix Knitting Works

195 F. 763, 115 C.C.A. 462, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1435

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMarch 27, 1912

DocketNo. 1,575

StatusPublished

This text of 195 F. 763 (Hygienic Fleeced Underwear Co. v. Phœnix Knitting Works) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hygienic Fleeced Underwear Co. v. Phœnix Knitting Works, 195 F. 763, 115 C.C.A. 462, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1435 (3d Cir. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.

In the court below complainants, the owners by assignment of patent No. 963,235, granted July 5, 1910, to Mead, for a muffler, charged respondent with infringement of the first claim thereof. That court found the claim valid, and held the respondent infringed. From a decree so holding the present appeal was taken.

The opinion of the court below so well expresses the views we too have reached that an opinion by this court could but be substantially a restatement. We therefore content ourselves with reciting our conclusions, which are, first, that the insertion of a V-shaped collar in a neck muffler was the gist of Mead’s device, was original with him, the making dating back to April, 1907, and the sale thereof to November, 1907; secondly, the device involved patentable originality; thirdly, the disclosure of a V-shaped collar in Mead’s original specification warranted the patent authorities in suggesting and awarding to him, after proper amendment, the claim in question, which he had successfully antedated as against numerous applicants in interference.

The decree below is affirmed.

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

BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.

In the court below complainants, the owners by assignment of patent No. 963,235, granted July 5, 1910, to Mead, for a muffler, charged respondent with infringement of the first claim thereof. That court found the claim valid, and held the respondent infringed. From a decree so holding the present appeal was taken.

The opinion of the court below so well expresses the views we too have reached that an opinion by this court could but be substantially a restatement. We therefore content ourselves with reciting our conclusions, which are, first, that the insertion of a V-shaped collar in a neck muffler was the gist of Mead’s device, was original with him, the making dating back to April, 1907, and the sale thereof to November, 1907; secondly, the device involved patentable originality; thirdly, the disclosure of a V-shaped collar in Mead’s original specification warranted the patent authorities in suggesting and awarding to him, after proper amendment, the claim in question, which he had successfully antedated as against numerous applicants in interference.

The decree below is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

195 F. 763, 115 C.C.A. 462, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hygienic-fleeced-underwear-co-v-phnix-knitting-works-ca3-1912.