C. O. Tingley & Co. v. Badger Rubber Works
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1DissentEvans, Circuit Judge
This court said, in Damrow Bros. Co. v. Stoelting Bros. Co. (C. C. A.) 295 F. 492:
“While a patent carries with it a prima facie presumption of validity, yet that presumption does not hold if the patent is found to be invalid upon its face.”
In support of this statement, Richards v. Chase Elevator Co., 158 U. S. 299, 301, 15 S. Ct. 831 (39 L. Ed. 991), Sodemann Heat & Power Co. v. Kauffman (C. C. A.) 275 F. 593, 595, and De Vry Corporation v. Acme Motion Picture Projector Co. (C. C. A.) 262 F. 970, are cited. In the last-cited case, other authorities may be found supporting this position.
It…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Richards v. Chase Elevator Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Sodemann Heat & Power Co. v. KauffmanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1921
- De Vry Corp. v. Acme Motion Picture Projector Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1920
- Damrow Bros. Co. v. Stoelting Bros. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1924