New Process Fermentation Co. v. Maus
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana
This was a bill filed against the defendants for an alleged infringement of a patent granted May 20, 1879, to Bartholomae, as assignee of Meller & Hofmann. Bartholomae has assigned his interest to the plaintiff, a corporation of tho state of Illinois. Meller & Hofmann bad previously (1876 and 1877) taken out patents in France and Belgium.
Read the full summary
This was a bill filed against the defendants for an alleged infringement of a patent granted May 20, 1879, to Bartholomae, as assignee of Meller & Hofmann. Bartholomae has assigned his interest to the plaintiff, a corporation of tho state of Illinois. Meller & Hofmann bad previously (1876 and 1877) taken out patents in France and Belgium. The specifications give a description of the manner in which beer had been brewed previously, viz.: That after cooking and cooling it was put in open vessels for fermentation, and after a certain number of days it was drawn off from the yeast into large…
1Opinion of the CourtDrummond, J.
Nearly all the claims in this case, as well as the specifications, speak of the beer in what is called the krseusen stage. The specifications term “krseusen” young beer, and also use the words “krseusen stage,” the inference being that it refers to that condition or the beer when it is considered young. But, in the evidence of the plaintiff, one of the witnesses particularly describes what the krseusen stage is. He calls krseusen a fermenting sweet-beer wort during the first stage of the main fermentation,.in which a foam of a very dense, curly white appearance is formed on the surface, and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Cochrane v. DeenerSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Mowry v. WhitneySupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Le Roy v. TathamSupreme Court of the United States · 1853
- McCLURG v. KINGSLANDSupreme Court of the United States · 1843
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Burr v. CowperthwaitU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1858