Legal Opinion

Celluloid Manuf'g Co. v. American Zylonite Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts

Decided September 7, 1887PublishedCited by 3 opinions

This was a bill in equity for the infringement of letters patent issued' to Joint \V. Hyatt, February 5, 1878, for an “improvement in the manufacture of sheets of celluloid and other plastic compositions.”

Read the full summary

This was a bill in equity for the infringement of letters patent issued' to Joint \V. Hyatt, February 5, 1878, for an “improvement in the manufacture of sheets of celluloid and other plastic compositions.” The material parts of the specification were as follows: “The invention relates to an improved apparatus, and process for the manufacture of sheets of plastic composition, and in the [¡resent instance is applied to the article known as ‘ celluloid.’ Heretofore the great obstacle to successfully planing or reducing plastic or pliable material to sheets, by scouring it upon a surface and then…

1Opinion of the Court

Gray, Justice.

Pyroxyline, otherwise called nitro-cellulose, or gun-cotton, is made by subjecting a. fibrous material, such as paper or cotton ¡rags, to the action of nitric and sulphuric acids. Celluloid, or zylonite, is made by combining pyroxyline with a solvent of camphor and alcohol, and passing the compound through heated rollers into the form of rough sheets or slabs. The evidence clearly establishes that, in the state of .■science and knowledge before the experiments and discovery of Hyatt, no one had been able to form a massive rectangular slab or block of celluloid; and that the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  3. Cochrane v. DeenerSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  4. Corning v. BurdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
  5. Pennsylvania Railroad v. Locomotive Engine Safety Truck Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1884

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Malignani v. Germania Electric Lamp Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1909
  2. Milburn v. Federal Sugar Refining Co. of YonkersCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1908
  3. Matrix Contrast Corp. v. KellarDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API