Lu Lawrence v. The Gillette Company and Batten, Barton, Durstine & Osborn, Inc.

Good Law
603 F.2d 68·202 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 642·1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 14405
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 29, 197977-3230California459 words

Opinion

Opinion

Merrill, J.

Appellant is the owner of United States Patent No. 3,849,596 issued November 19, 1974 entitled “Method For Comparison Using Simultaneous Displays On A Visual Monitor.” Simply stated it consists of a method of comparing subject A (previously recorded on videotape) and subject B (live) in simultaneous action by use of a split screen multiplex unit. It is asserted to be a combination patent using split screen equipment old in the art in such a way as to enable a comparison to be made with unique effectiveness. Appellant charges appellee with infringement.

The district court rendered summary judgment for appellee. It concluded that the patent was invalid: that it was anticipated, that any advance in the art was obvious and that the invention had been described in printed publications in this country more than a year prior to application for patent.

The record establishes that a federally funded project known as “Speech Through Vision” had since prior to 1968 engaged in procedures designed to assist students in overcoming defects in speech production by use of a split screen comparison of a student and a speech therapist reading aloud the same material. This procedure was described…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.