Saf-T-Pop Corp. v. Harry E. Davis Co.

119 F.2d 416, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 3724
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedApril 11, 1941
DocketNo. 8617
StatusPublished

This text of 119 F.2d 416 (Saf-T-Pop Corp. v. Harry E. Davis Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Saf-T-Pop Corp. v. Harry E. Davis Co., 119 F.2d 416, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 3724 (6th Cir. 1941).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In an appeal from a decree dismissing the appellant’s bill for infringement of Guyon Patent No. 1,971,560, because of invalidity,

It appearing to the court that the claims of the patent in suit, (1) disclose no invention; (2) are not sufficiently specific to comply with the requirements of § 4886 of the patent laws, 35 U.S.C.A. § 31; (3) involve merely a change of materials over articles disclosed in the prior art; and (4) disclose a mere aggregation of two old devices productive of no new joint function within the condemnation of Reckendorfer v. Faber, 92 U.S. 347, 357, 23 L.Ed. 719; Lincoln Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp., 303 U.S. 545, 549, 58 S.Ct. 662, 82 L.Ed. 1008; and Toledo Pressed Steel Co. v. Standard Parts, Inc., 307 U.S. 350, 356, 59 S.Ct. 897, 83 L.Ed. 1334; wherefore,

It is ordered that the decree be, and it is hereby, affirmed.

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

Related

Reckendorfer v. Faber
92 U.S. 347 (Supreme Court, 1876)
Lincoln Engineering Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp.
303 U.S. 545 (Supreme Court, 1938)
Toledo Pressed Steel Co. v. Standard Parts, Inc.
307 U.S. 350 (Supreme Court, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
119 F.2d 416, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 3724, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saf-t-pop-corp-v-harry-e-davis-co-ca6-1941.