Kelley v. Atlantic City

Third Circuit

Kelley v. Atlantic City

89 F.2d 659, 32 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 584, 1937 U.S. App. LEXIS 3554

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided March 11, 1937·No. No. 6219·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.

This case concerns the alleged infringement by Atlantic City in its traffic signal system of patent No. 1,132,186, granted Elmer W. Kelley. This pateñt has been the subject of litigation in Kelly v. City of Syracuse (D.C.) 47 F.(2d) 347; in Id. (C. C.A.) 47 F. (2d) 349; in Kelly v. City of New York (D.C.) 58 F.(2d) 831; in Kelley v. City of New York (C.C.A.) 63 F.(2d) 1007; and in Id., 290 U.S. 637, 54 S.Ct. 54, 78 L.Ed. 554. It has also been critically and satisfactorily discussed by the judge below in an exhaustive opinion. Reference to the latter avoids needless restatement by this court.

As we agree with the reasoning and conclusions there reached, we limit ourselves to affirming the case on such opinion, only adding thereto the basic consideration that Kelley’s patent was founded on the fact that the gist of his alleged invention was in pointing out one path for fire apparatus, ambulances, and the like, while Atlantic City’s system provided several shutoff roads which such apparatus could take.

So holding, the judgment below is affirmed.

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

BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.

This case concerns the alleged infringement by Atlantic City in its traffic signal system of patent No. 1,132,186, granted Elmer W. Kelley. This pateñt has been the subject of litigation in Kelly v. City of Syracuse (D.C.) 47 F.(2d) 347; in Id. (C. C.A.) 47 F. (2d) 349; in Kelly v. City of New York (D.C.) 58 F.(2d) 831; in Kelley v. City of New York (C.C.A.) 63 F.(2d) 1007; and in Id., 290 U.S. 637, 54 S.Ct. 54, 78 L.Ed. 554. It has also been critically and satisfactorily discussed by the judge below in an exhaustive opinion. Reference to the latter avoids needless restatement by this court.

As we agree with the reasoning and conclusions there reached, we limit ourselves to affirming the case on such opinion, only adding thereto the basic consideration that Kelley’s patent was founded on the fact that the gist of his alleged invention was in pointing out one path for fire apparatus, ambulances, and the like, while Atlantic City’s system provided several shutoff roads which such apparatus could take.

So holding, the judgment below is affirmed.

Kelley v. Atlantic City, 89 F.2d 659, 32 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 584, 1937 U.S. App. LEXIS 3554 (3d Cir. 1937).

Pincite

89 F.2d 659 (Kelley v. Atlantic City) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related