District of Indiana, after an adverse decree against the plaintiffs.

The two Dills patents No. 1,323,458 and No. 1,391,670 held not anticipated to involve invention and infringed. The first patent is for a product while the second is for a process, both of which related to an artificial fish bait. Prior art showed it to be old to produce various kinds of fish baits including those having scales painted on, the fish body, but by appellants process a lure having scales was produced, which surpassed anything previously sold on the market. Appellants process for producing the particular result "comprises applying a coating of the color of that part of the fish bait body which is shown between the scales, then wrapping a flexible thread netting closely about the body, in such manner that the individual scales are outlined by the thread, then applying a coating of the color of the scales of the fish over the thread and over the first coating." Prior art showed it to be old to decorate lamp shades etc. by a similar process.

It was contended on behalf of the appellees that the described product and process were both merely matters of mechanical skill, but in view of the fact that there was such a demand for the product and also since the appellee had requested particulars from the appellant about the patented process even though skilled in the art himself, both patents were held valid and infringed, the judge concurring with the argument of appellee's counsel that both patents should stand or fall together.

Appellee's attempt to prove prior use held unwarranted in view of the evidence.

Appellee's attempt to show collusion between patentee and another in an interference proceeding, held unwarranted in view of the evidence.

Dissenting opinion did not believe product patent which, since the use of scales on lures was well known in the art and the "decree of perfection in appellant's scales comes from the employment of his process."

STANLEY BILOS, Div. 50.

WILKIE vs. MANHATTAN RUBBER MFG. CO., 14 Fed. (2nd) 811. Circuit Court of Appeals Third Circuit, Sept. 13, 1926.

Appeal from District Court of the U. S. for the District of N. J.

Suit in equity involving infringement of Pat. 900,055 Decree for defendant. Complainant appeals.

The patent was for a squeeze roll in wool-washing machinery and the evidence showed that the patented device had been sold and had been in public use more than two years prior to the filing of the application. Complainant maintained that use was merely for experimental purposes in order to make durability tests of the rolls, but it was shown that no observations, as to the operativeness of the device was made.

In view of the facts it was held by the court that "on proof of public use and sale of an invention more than two years before the application for patent thereon, the inference of inventors intention to abandon his invention to the public is established unless successfully controverted by full, unequivocal and convincing proof that such use and sale were not of the completed device subsequently patented, or that they were not absolutely and unconditional, but principally and primarily for the purpose of perfecting the invention by tests and experiments."

STANLEY BIOLOS, Div. 50.

SPRING DANCE.

The Social Committee announces that the annual spring dance will be held at Meridian Mansions on March 5. The Meridians Mansions where the dance is to be held has one of the best ball rooms in Washington. The Committee has engaged Happy Walker's Golden Pheasant Orchestra for the occasion. With the prospect of a fine ball room and good music all who attend will be insured of a pleasant evening.

OF THE

Patent Office Society

Published monthly by the Patent Office Society. Office of Publication 3387 Stuyvesant Place, N. W., Washington, D. C. Subscription $2.50 a year Single copy 25 cents

Max W. Tucker, Editor-in-Chief.

A. H. Winkelstein, Case editor. M. O. Price, Periodical abstracter. Wm. I. Wyman

E. R. Cole

G. P. Tucker

R. E. Adams

A. S. Greenberg

W. B. Johnson C. C. Pidgeon

M. L. Whitney, Business Manager (Room 182, U. S. Patent Office.) 3319 Stuyvesant Place, Washington, D. C.

N. E. Eccleston, Circulation.

Entered as second class matter, September 17, 1918, at the post office at Washington, D. C., under the act of March 3, 1879.

Publication of signed articles in this journal is not to be understood as an adoption by the Patent Office Society of the views expressed therein. The editors are glad to have pertinent articles submitted.

VOL. IX

MARCH, 1927.

No. 7.

COMMENTS.

Mr. Emerson Stringham has retired from the office of President of the Patent Office Society, which he has held with distinction for two years. His administration has been marked with an enthusiasm and an energy that have contributed much to whatever the Society has achieved of its object, the improvement of the patent system. Well informed on anything that pertains to the Patent Office or patent matters generally, Mr. Stringham was eminently fitted to administer the office to which the Society elected him. The rewards derived from the holding of the position, whatever they may be, are not pecuniary. It is probable they begin and end with a