Allen v. Blunt
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
[At law. Action on the case by Ethan Allen against Orisson Blunt and others] for infringing patent [No. 461] for “an improvement in the method of constructing locks for fire arms.” Plea the general issue, with a special statement of matters of defence.
Read the full summary
[At law. Action on the case by Ethan Allen against Orisson Blunt and others] for infringing patent [No. 461] for “an improvement in the method of constructing locks for fire arms.” Plea the general issue, with a special statement of matters of defence. At the trial it appeared that the original patent was granted on the 11th of November, 1837, and was surrendered for some imperfections in the specifications, and a new amended patent was taken out on the loth of January, 1841, which was again for a like defect, surrendered, and a new, amended patent was taken out on the 3rd of August, 1S44.…
1Opinion of the Court
STORY, Circuit Justice.
The 13th section of the patent act of 1836, c. 357, enacts, that whenever any patent shall be inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective or insufficient description or specification, or by reason of the patentee claiming in his specification, as his own invention, more than he had, or shall have a right to claim as new, if the error has or shall have arisen by inad-vertency, accident or mistake, and without any fraudulent or deceptive intention, it shall be lawful for the commissioner, upon the surrender to him of such patent, and the payment of the further duty…
2Cited by13 opinions
- State v. Illinois Central RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1910
- Henderson v. SmithWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1885
- Sheldon v. StewartMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- People ex rel. Horn v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- State v. WadeWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1879
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.