Home/Ninth Circuit/Norwood v. Ehrenreich Photo-Optical industries, Inc.

Norwood v. Ehrenreich Photo-Optical industries, Inc.

529 F.2d 3, 189 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 196, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 11682
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedDecember 3, 1975
DocketNo. 71-1835
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 529 F.2d 3 (Norwood v. Ehrenreich Photo-Optical industries, 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
Norwood v. Ehrenreich Photo-Optical industries, Inc., 529 F.2d 3, 189 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 196, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 11682 (9th Cir. 1975).

Opinion

OPINION

Before KOELSCH, KILKENNY and WALLACE, Circuit Judges.

KOELSCH, Circuit Judge:

The matter is here on the appeal of Donald W. Norwood, plaintiff below, from a judgment holding claims 1 through 4, 6, 7 and 9 of his U.S. Patent No. 3,304,435 (the “435” patent) invalid and not infringed by defendants’ accused device. 322 F.Supp. 898 (C.D.Cal.1970). We conclude that the trial court’s decision was correct on both grounds.

The “435” patent was granted plaintiff on February 14, 1967, pursuant to an application filed July 18, 1963. It covers a “photometric device having greater response to a preferential central portion of a scene.” In common parlance, the device is a meter (for use principally in photography) employing a photoelectric cell to measure the intensity of light reflected from objects; its particular feature is its fabrication to “indicate an intermediate value between the average brightness of the preferential central smaller portion of [a] scene and the average brightness of the remaining larger portion of [that] scene.” “435” patent, claim 9, col. 10, lines 16-20.

Emphasis on the central portion of the scene, which normally contains the object or objects of interest to the photographer, is achieved by interposing a filter having an aperture at its center between the photoelectric cell and the viewing lens [see FIGURE IA]

[5]*5

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

Related

Sidewinder Marine, Inc. v. Starbuck Kustom Boats and Products, Inc.
597 F.2d 201 (Tenth Circuit, 1979)
Norwood v. Ehrenreich Photo-Optical Industries
529 F.2d 3 (Ninth Circuit, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
529 F.2d 3, 189 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 196, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 11682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norwood-v-ehrenreich-photo-optical-industries-inc-ca9-1975.