Universal Arch Co. v. American Arch Co.

290 F. 647, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1458
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
DecidedSeptember 28, 1922
DocketNos. 3100, 3101
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 290 F. 647 (Universal Arch Co. v. American Arch Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Universal Arch Co. v. American Arch Co., 290 F. 647, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1458 (7th Cir. 1922).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Use of fire brick in arches and baffles in furnaces was very old. In adapting for use in the fire boxes of locomotives the devices that were known in connection with stationary boilers, the question in each instance was whether the adaptation came from the ordinary advance due to the mechanical skill of the practitioners of the art, or whether there was an additional advance that came from the creative imagination of one who was therefore entitled to rank as an inventor. Of course, all doubts should be resolved in favor of patentees, and every shred of inventive progress should be protected. But the trouble is that no absolute yardstick has been devised.

On reviewing the record in this cause we are left with the conviction that the proper spirit of approach and method of disposition are evidenced in the opinion which led to the decree that is now affirmed.

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

Related

Van Alen v. Aluminum Co. of America
43 F. Supp. 833 (S.D. New York, 1942)
Banker v. Ford Motor Co.
3 F. Supp. 737 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1933)
Dwight & Lloyd Sintering Co. v. Greenawalt
27 F.2d 823 (Second Circuit, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
290 F. 647, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/universal-arch-co-v-american-arch-co-ca7-1922.