J. E. Hanger. Inc. v. J. F. Rowley Co.

298 F. 359, 54 App. D.C. 336, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2654
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided April 7, 1924·No. No. 4012·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

ROBB, Associate Justice.

This is an infringement suit, involving patent No. 961,165, issued to appellee, Rowley, June 14, 1910, for an “artificial limb suspender and back check.” The trial court found claims Nos. 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 12 valid and infringed by the appellant corporation.

In his specification Rowley says:

“The main objects of this invention are to provide an artificial limb and suspender embodying the invention described in my patent No. 644,464, but in which the connection between the suspender and the leg section, whereby the latter is moved on its knee joint, is made through the interior of the thigh section, instead of being made outside of the kpee joint, as in the specific form of said invention shown in the drawing forming part of the specification of said patent, and to provide a suitable form of back check and connection between the back check and the suspender, whereby the leg section may be moved forward on its pivotal connection with the thigh section.”

It thus becomes important to determine the scope of Rowley’s earlier patent, Figures 1 and 2 of which we here reproduce, together with Figures 1 and 2 of the patent in suit:

[360]

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

J. E. Hanger. Inc. v. J. F. Rowley Co., 298 F. 359, 54 App. D.C. 336, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2654 (D.C. Cir. 1924).

298 F. 359 (J. E. Hanger. Inc. v. J. F. Rowley Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Imperial Brass Mfg. Co. v. Bonney Forge & Tool Works, Inc.
38 F. Supp. 829 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1941)
J. F. Rowley Co. v. Chester B. Winn, Inc.
41 F.2d 88 (W.D. New York, 1929)
J. F. Rowley Co. v. Rowley
18 F.2d 704 (Third Circuit, 1927)