Dornan v. Keefer
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania
Motion to compel a patentee called as witness to answer interrogatories. Interference proceedings in United States patent-office between T. B. Doman and William B. Keefer, the latter being the patentee of letters patent No. 443,0-95 for ingrain carpet fabric. Keefer had declined to describe other than by reference to his patent the method of weaving employed to produce a fabric offered in evidence as part of the proof of date of Keefer’s invention.
1Opinion of the Court
Butler, District Judge.
The court’s jurisdiction is admitted by counsel; and that subject need not therefore be considered. The witness declines to answer on the ground that the questions propounded are-nqt proper cross-examination, are irrelevant tó the subject in controversy, and that they seek the disclosure of a secret discovery or invention — such as is protected by section 4908 of the Revised Statutes. Neither ground can be sustained. I need not discuss the subject. It is sufficient to say that the interrogatories seem to arise out of the examination in chief; and the information sought…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Dow Chemical Co. v. American Bromine Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1920
- Carson Inv. Co. v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.District Court, D. Montana · 1926