Himes

Appellant as owner of “Parks” patent No. 2,Oil,232, and the “Himes” patent No. 2,243,421, brought this action to recover damages for alleged infringement of both patents by the appellee. After a trial by jury, and at the conclusion of the evidence, the appellee moved for a directed verdict. The motion was denied and the case submitted upon instructions the correctness of which is not challenged by either party. The jury returned a verdict finding the claims in issue to be valid and infringed. Thereupon defendant-appellee moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which motion was sustained. Judgment was entered adjudging the claims in issue under both patents to be invalid and that the claim of the Himes patent which was in issue was not infringed. In granting the prayer of defendant’s counterclaim, the judgment enjoined plaintiffs from prosecuting in any court any suits or actions against the defendant or his customers for infringement of either of the patents.

On this appeal from the judgment, primary emphasis is placed upon the proposition that the- presence or absence of patentable invention, and whether there was infringement, were questions of fact and that it was the…