Legal Opinion

Marsh v. Nichols

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided March 5, 1883Published

In Equity. This was a bill in equity to recover damages for the infringement of patent No. 236,052, issued to Elon A. Marsh, for an improvement in steam-engine valve gear. The only defense made upon the hearing was that there was no such patent in existence at the time the bill was filed.

Read the full summary

In Equity. This was a bill in equity to recover damages for the infringement of patent No. 236,052, issued to Elon A. Marsh, for an improvement in steam-engine valve gear. The only defense made upon the hearing was that there was no such patent in existence at the time the bill was filed. Complainants produced at the hearing a patent marked Exhibit A, hearing date December 28, 1880, and purporting to be signed by “A. Boll, Acting Secretary of the Interior,” and “E. M. Marble, Commissioner of Patents.” The further evidence consisted of a stipulation to the following effect: “That the patent,…

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

Section 4883 of the Revised Statutes requires all patents to be issued in the name of the United States, under the seal of the patent-office, and. signed by the secretary of the interior, and countersigned by the commissioner of patents. The patent in this case was regularly issued the twenty-eighth of December, 1880, except that it was not signed by the secretary of the interior. Without this signature it was not merely a defective instrument; it was wholly void. The statute has required the patent to be attested by certain signatures, and the omission of one is as fatal as the omission of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McGarrahan v. Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Bell v. HearneSupreme Court of the United States · 1857
  3. Goodman v. RandallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1877

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API