Legal Opinion
Hills v. Hamilton Watch Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 9, 1918No. 1471PublishedCited by 5 opinions
In Equity. Suit by Edward R. Hills against the Hamilton Watch Company. On final hearing. Decree dismissing bill.
1Opinion of the Court
DICKINSON, District Judge.
The conclusions reached in this case are:
1. The patent of the plaintiff is valid (thus including a finding of utility), hut the claims, in view of the prior art, are to be so read as to restrict all proprietary rights to the specific structure described.
2. The structural differences between the defendant’s device and that described in plaintiff’s patent are so real, or at least the doubt of their being merely formal and the differences being only in the use of mechanical equivalents, is so great, as, in view of the patent of the plaintiff being a mere paper patent,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Globe Knitting Works v. SegalCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1917
- General Electric Co. v. Yost Electric Mfg. Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1913
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kurtz v. Belle Hat Lining Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- Triplex Safety Glass Co. of North America v. KolbDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1931
- Curtiss Aerocar Co. v. SpringerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1936
- Hills v. Hamilton Watch Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1918
- Jost v. Borden Stove Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1919