Bergman v. Aluminum Lock Shingle Corporation Of America

251 F.2d 801 116 U.S.P.Q. 32 Harry X. BERGMAN, Perma-Lox Aluminum Shingle Corporation and Victor H. Langville, doing business under the assumed name of Langville Manufacturing Company, Appellants, v. ALUMINUM LOCK SHINGLE CORPORATION OF AMERICA, Appellee. No. 15589. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Dec. 13, 1957, Rehearing Denied Feb. 14, 1958. J. Pierre Kolisch, Ramsey & Kolisch, Portland, Ore., for appellants. S. J. Bischoff, Portland, Ore., for appellee. Before HEALY, POPE and LEMMON, Circuit Judges. LEMMON, Circuit Judge. Twilight is falling upon 'gadgets' as subjects of patents. The dusk commenced to gather half a dozen years ago when, in an epochal decision, 1 the Supreme Court fixed its canon against dignifying combined 'segments of prior art' with the title of 'inventions'. In a concurring opinion in that case, Mr. Justice Douglas compiled a devastating list of 'gadgets' that have been placed 'under the armour of patents'. 2 The specification at bar proclaims at the outset that it is a 'drain slot which forms the basis of this invention'. If the trivial devices listed by Mr. Justice Douglas are 'gadgets', then, in the hierarchy of invention, a slot should…