Up-Right, Inc., a Corporation, and Wallace J. S. Johnson v. Patent Scaffolding Co., Inc., a Corporation

Ninth Circuit

Up-Right, Inc., a Corporation, and Wallace J. S. Johnson v. Patent Scaffolding Co., Inc., a Corporation

228 F.2d 102, 108 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 24, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5409

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedDecember 2, 1955

Docket14617

StatusPublished

This text of 228 F.2d 102 (Up-Right, Inc., a Corporation, and Wallace J. S. Johnson v. Patent Scaffolding Co., Inc., a Corporation) 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

Up-Right, Inc., a Corporation, and Wallace J. S. Johnson v. Patent Scaffolding Co., Inc., a Corporation, 228 F.2d 102, 108 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 24, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5409 (9th Cir. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Up-Right, Inc. and Johnson appeal from a judgment of the district court denying appellants’ recovery for patent infringement on the ground that their patent is invalid. The question presented is whether appellants’ patented adjustable scaffold leg is a “combination” of old elements which produces a new *103 function and results, or only an “aggregation” of old elements each performing its well known function.

The judgment is affirmed on the grounds stated in District Judge Goodman’s memorandum decision, findings of fact and conclusions of law reported in 135 F.Supp. 813.

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

PER CURIAM.

Up-Right, Inc. and Johnson appeal from a judgment of the district court denying appellants’ recovery for patent infringement on the ground that their patent is invalid. The question presented is whether appellants’ patented adjustable scaffold leg is a “combination” of old elements which produces a new *103 function and results, or only an “aggregation” of old elements each performing its well known function.

The judgment is affirmed on the grounds stated in District Judge Goodman’s memorandum decision, findings of fact and conclusions of law reported in 135 F.Supp. 813.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

228 F.2d 102, 108 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 24, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/up-right-inc-a-corporation-and-wallace-j-s-johnson-v-patent-ca9-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack