Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

treatise covers the entire field of the patent laws of the United States, as those laws were enacted in the statutes and developed in the decisions, from the foundation of the national government in 1789, down to the first day of September, 1883. How accurately and well it covers that field, is a question which belongs to the bar and to the bench; and to the generous judgment of the bench and of the bar, I commit the result of my long and interesting labor.

A. H. W. HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT,

September 26, 1883.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

[ocr errors]

cases

11a. Illustrated by the Telephone

3. Patent law meaning of the word Cases.

“ art."

12. Illustrated by the five cases

4. Patent law meaning of the word when compared.

process," as illustrated in the 13. Illustrated by the five

case of Corning o. Burden.

when contrasted.

5. Patent law meaning of the word 14. Deduced from the five cases as

“process," as illustrated by compared and contrasted.

the case of MacKay 0. Jack- 15. Illustrated by the eighth claim

man, and by other Circuit Court of Morse.

cases.

16. Machines, and improvements of

6. Patent law meaning of the machines.

word "process," precisely de- 17. Manufactures.

fined.

18. Compositions of matter.

7. Difference between a patent for a 19. Distinction between machines,

“process," and a patent for a manufactures, and composi-

“principle,” inquired into.

tions of matter.

8. Illustrated by the case of McClurg 20. Designs.

0. Kingsland.

21. On whose invention designs are

9. Illustrated by the case of O'Reil- patentable.

ly o. Morse.

22. Utility and beauty of designs.

9)

CHAPTER II.

INVENTION.

23. Invention necessary to patent-

ability.

24. Many negative rules, but no

affirmative rule, for determiu-

.Pages 20-43

ing the presence or absence of

invention.

25. Mere mechanical skill is not in-

vention.

26. Circumstances indicating differ-

ence between invention and me-

chanical skill.

27. Excellence of workmanship is

not invention.

28. Substitution of materials is not

invention.

29. Exception to the last rule.

30. Enlargement is not invention.

31. Change of degree is not inven.

tion.

32. Aggregation is not invention.

33. Simultaneousness of action is not

necessary to invention.

34. Duplication is not invention.

35. Omission is not generally in-

vention.

36. Substitution of equivalents is

not invention.

37. New combination, without new

mode of operation, is not inven-

tion.

38. Using old thing for new purpose

is not invention.

CHAPTER III.

NOVELTY...

52. Novelty necessary to patent-

ability.

53. Novelty defined.

54. Not negatived by knowledge or

use in a foreign country.

55. Not negatived by private patent

granted in a foreign country.

56. Prior printed publications.

57. Fullness of prior patents and

printed publications.

58. Novelty not negatived by any

abandoned application.

59. Qualification of the last rule.

60. Suocessful prior applications.

61. Novelty not negatived by any

unpublished drawing, or prior

model.

tically useless. [tiquity of parts.

66. Novelty not negatived by an-

67. Novelty pot negatived by prior

accidental and not understood

production.

68. Novelty not negatived by any.

thing neither designed, nor ap-

parently adapted, nor actually

used for the same purpose as the

invention.

[blocks in formation]
« iepriekšējāTurpināt »