Agawam Co. v. Jordan
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Circuit Court for Massachusetts, the suit having been one to restrain the use, by the Agawam Woollen Company, of a certain machine for manufacturing wool 'aiid other fibrous materials, patented to John Goulding. ■ The process formerly in use in the production of yarn from wool, was by a set of carding engines, a' billy and a jenny; a series usually consisting of three carding machines, commholy called a first breaker, a second breaker, and a finisher, one billy…
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court for Massachusetts, the suit having been one to restrain the use, by the Agawam Woollen Company, of a certain machine for manufacturing wool 'aiid other fibrous materials, patented to John Goulding. ■ The process formerly in use in the production of yarn from wool, was by a set of carding engines, a' billy and a jenny; a series usually consisting of three carding machines, commholy called a first breaker, a second breaker, and a finisher, one billy and two jennies, sometimes two double carding machines being used instead of three single carding machines. ■ The wool…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Clifford
Patentees acquire, by virtue of their letters patent, if properly granted and in due -form, the full and exclusive right and liberty of making, using, and vending to others to, be used, their respective inventions for the term of years allowed by law at the time when the letters patent- were issued. Such-exclusive right and liberty may.be held and enjoyed by the patentee throughout the entire term for which it is granted; or he may assign the letters patent, by an instrument' in writing, either as to the whole interest or any undivided part thereof; or he may grant arid convey to another the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pennock v. DialogueSupreme Court of the United States · 1829
- Hoyt v. Shelden, Ex'r of Thompson, and the Long Island Railroad CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1862
3Cited by135 opinions
- Terry v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- C.R. Bard, Inc. v. M3 Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Medtronic, Inc. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC.Supreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Minerals Separation, Ltd. v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. Formica Insulation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
130 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.