D. M. Sechler Carriage Co. v. Deere & Mansur Co.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. This is a bill brought by the appellant, D. M. Sechler Carriage Company, against the Deere & Mansur Company for infringement of letters patent numbered 593,295, dated November 9, 1897, to Clarence H. Dooley, for “combined cheek row and drill corn planter.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. This is a bill brought by the appellant, D. M. Sechler Carriage Company, against the Deere & Mansur Company for infringement of letters patent numbered 593,295, dated November 9, 1897, to Clarence H. Dooley, for “combined cheek row and drill corn planter.” The bill was in the usual form, and set out at large the instrument by which it is claimed Dooley assigned the patent to the appellant. This instrument is as follows: “This agreement, made this 18th day of February, 1898, between Clarence H. Dooley, of…
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, Circuit Judge
The only question presented is whether Dooley is a necessary party to the suit. This question in turn depends upon the further question whether the contract constituted an assignment by Dooley of his title to the patent, or was merely an exclusive license. An assignment or grant conveys (i) the whole patent, comprising the exclusive right to make, use, and vend the invention throughout the United States; or (2) an undivided part or share of that exclusive right; or (3) the exclusive right under the patent within and throughout a specified part of the United States. “A transfer of either of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Waterman v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Gayler v. WilderSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Pope Manufacturing Co. v. Gormully & Jeffery Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Johnson Railroad Signal Co. v. Union Switch & Signal Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania · 1893
- Pope Manufacturing Co. v. Gormully & Jeffery Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1892
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Allen, Collector of Internal Revenue v. WernerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1951
- Orla E. Watson and Edith Watson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1955
- Parker Rust-Proof Co. v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
- Arnold v. North American Chemical Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Nachod & United States Signal Co. v. Automatic Signal Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.