Porter v. Single-Tube Automobile & Bicycle Tire Co.
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts.
1Per curiam
It was not contended at the hearing, either in the court below or before us, that the publication by Boothroyd of *424.December-3, '1890, anticipated the invention, in litigation. Neither •■are we sufficiently advised .whether the record is in condition to properly. determine such a contention, if made. We give no - intimation of What opr conclusion would be if, in these respects, the conditions were other than they are. We are of the opinion that claim 2 fully ■and correctly represents the invention of the patent, and that claim •I. is too broad to be valid. With these reservations, after…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Single Tube Automobile & Bicycle Tire Co. v. Continental Rubber WorksU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania · 1909