International Terra Cotta Lumber Co. v. Maurer
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
On Demurrer. This action is based upon reissued letters patent, No. 10,419 and No. 10,420, now owned by the complainant. Tho original patent, No. 248,-094, was granted to Charles C. Gilman, October 11, 1881, for an improvement in fire-proof composition. Subsequently, tho patent was surrendered and issued in two divisions.
Read the full summary
On Demurrer. This action is based upon reissued letters patent, No. 10,419 and No. 10,420, now owned by the complainant. Tho original patent, No. 248,-094, was granted to Charles C. Gilman, October 11, 1881, for an improvement in fire-proof composition. Subsequently, tho patent was surrendered and issued in two divisions. The bill alleges as follows: “On the eleventh day of October, 1881, letters patent of the United States numbered 3STo. 248,094, signed, sealed and executed in due form of law, and bearing date the day and year last aforesaid, were issued to said Charles Carroll Oilman,…
1Opinion of the CourtCoxis, J.
The complainant contends that, the original letters patent are no part of the bill and that the questions affecting the validity of the reissues cannot be considered on demurrer. It will be observed that the averments of the bill having reference to the original are almost identical with those employed in alleging the reissues, upon which the action is founded. In each instance the language is explicit and exact, leaving no doubt that tho pleader intended to make all those instruments a part of the bill without incumbering the record with copies, in externo. Pro-fert and oyer are tendered in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mahn v. HarwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Gage v. HerringSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Powder Co. v. Powder WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Coon v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Yale Lock Manufacturing Co. v. Berkshire National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fowler v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1903
- Fichtel v. BarthelU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1909
- Fowler v. City of New YorkU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1901
- Rawson & Morrison Mfg. Co. v. C. W. Hunt Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1906