Roberts v. Roter
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania
Motion for provisional injunction. Suit brought [by Edward A. L. Roberts against F. A. Roter] on letters patent [No. 59,936] for “improvement in method of increasing capacity of oil-wells,-’ granted to complainant November 20. 1866. for seventeen years from May 20, 1866 [reissued January 26, 1875; No. 6,258]. The nature of the invention is fully set forth in the report of the case of Roberts v. Dickey [Case No. 11,899], where the specification is given in full.
1Opinion of the Court
McKENXAN, Circuit Judge.
In Roberts v. Dickey [supra] the complainant’s patent for a method of increasing the capacity of oil-wells, etc., was earnestly contested, but its validity was sustained in an elaborate opinion delivered by Mr.- Justice STRONG, *912which expressed the views of both the judges who heard the case. The counsel for the defendant properly assumes that, so far as the present motion is concerned, the validity of the patent is not an open question. But he opposes the motion on the ground that, as the patent is expounded in the opinion referred to, the respondent has not infringed…
2Cited by1 opinion
- United States Mitis Co. v. Carnegie Steel Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania · 1898